Apprenticeships and Skills Training

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Monday 2nd June 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

We have announced radical reforms to the skills system to support 120,000 new training opportunities this Parliament. We are continuing to invest in programmes designed to boost the workforce in key growth sectors and making changes to support opportunity for young people. Skills are an engine of economic growth, improving productivity and giving people the opportunity to thrive in work and life. To deliver on our plan for change, we need a skills system that is geared to deliver the skills we need, focused on economic priorities and supporting opportunity for learners.

Creating more opportunities for young people with the growth and skills levy

Last year, the Prime Minister announced a new growth and skills levy, which is now backed by its largest ever budget of over £3 billion. This will provide greater flexibility to employers and learners and widen the apprenticeship offer, helping more people gain the skills they need, fuelling business innovation, and providing high-quality pathways for young people.

The rate of young people’s apprenticeship starts have fallen more dramatically than the overall decline over the last decade. We want to rebalance the programme back towards young people beginning their careers. As a first step, we are introducing new foundation apprenticeships, which are an employment-based training offer that give young people a route into careers in critical sectors, enabling them to earn a wage while developing vital skills.

The first foundation apprenticeships will be available from August 2025. They will be focused on industrial strategy priority areas including construction and the built environment, engineering and manufacturing, health and social care, and digital. They will be underpinned by an employer incentive payment to contribute to the extra costs of supporting someone at the beginning of their career, such as through coaching and mentoring. We will continue exploring how to make foundation apprenticeships work in other sectors like hospitality and retail too. We expect this to drive up to 30,000 apprenticeship starts across this Parliament.

This reform will be complemented by changes to the wider apprenticeships offer that we have already set out, such as shorter duration apprenticeships and more flexible English and maths requirements.



Creating more opportunities for young people at the start of their working lives means we need to prioritise public funding towards them, rather than those already in work with more prior learning and qualifications. That is why we announced our intention to move funding away from level 7—masters-level—apprenticeships, to support a more flexible offer at lower levels.

I am now confirming that we will proceed with this reform. We will continue to fund level 7 for those aged 16 to 21—when they start their apprenticeship—and support apprentices already on a level 7 apprenticeship through to completion. This change will apply from January 2026 across all sectors.

Skills England was asked to provide insight into the impact of defunding level 7 apprenticeships. They engaged with over 700 stakeholders from various sectors, employer representative bodies, and young people, which indicated that, in general, level 7 apprenticeships were high-quality and were well supported, by employers. Many learners who completed these apprenticeships saw higher wages one year after study, compared with the average UK salary. It was also clear that these apprenticeships are important for meeting the skills needs of the economy. However, alternative routes are well supplied and Skills England’s evidence suggested there was unlikely to be a significant or unavoidable fall in the supply of these skills in the long term, post-defunding. Therefore, we will be encouraging employers to invest in upskilling their staff to this level, to enable levy funding to be rebalanced towards training at lower levels.

Skills England did not find a strong enough economic rationale to exempt a small group of level 7 apprenticeship standards from defunding. While level 7 apprenticeships can be a valuable route for some disadvantaged learners, a significant proportion are from non-deprived backgrounds and are significantly less likely to be deprived than apprentices at lower levels. Level 7 generally has a higher proportion of older learners than other apprenticeships, particularly the senior leader apprenticeship—where 99% are over 25—and standards with an embedded postgraduate qualification.

However, there are several exceptions which benefit young people at the start of their careers, like solicitors and accountancy or taxation professionals. This is why we have decided that younger learners, from all backgrounds, will continue to be funded under our reforms. Level 7 apprenticeships are a valuable entry point for young people into good careers, such as law, accountancy and town planning; we have seen thousands take advantage of these opportunities and this will continue under our new approach.

This decision was informed by a wide range of evidence, including Skills England’s analysis of official apprenticeship statistics and engagement with a wide range of stakeholders. We also considered wider data and representations and weighed this up against the Government’s clear priorities.

This decision to prioritise young people is a crucial step in delivering the Government’s plan for change and achieving its missions of driving growth and breaking down barriers to opportunity. We are prioritising funding towards young people and creating more opportunities for those entering the labour market, who need skills and training to get on in their careers, and powering growth across the country by providing the skills businesses need.

Expanding skills funding via the immigration skills charge

We are also expanding funding in the wider skills system to support growth and opportunity. In the immigration White Paper published on Monday 12 May, the Government confirmed a 32% increase in the rate of the immigration skills charge, which will be used at the oncoming spending review to support skills funding for priority sectors to upskill the domestic workforce and reduce reliance on migration over the medium term. The increase in the immigration skills charge could help deliver up to 45,000 training places across this Parliament.

Boosting investment in skills for growth

We are also increasing investment in construction skills, building on more than £600 million announced by the Chancellor in March. We are boosting job prospects for adults interested in jobs in the sector, expanding training in priority sectors via skills bootcamps and free courses for jobs:

The Department will devolve around £14 million of additional adult skills funding for the construction sector to local mayors for next academic year, giving them the freedom to make the right choices for their areas. We expect this to deliver up to 5,000 additional adult learners on training courses.

For non-devolved areas, 13 new construction courses at level 2 will be added to the free courses for jobs offer available for adults so more people can upskill, improve their job prospects and earn a higher wage.

The Government are confirming £136 million for providing skills bootcamps across a range of priority sectors in 2025-26 at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/skills-bootcamps-funding-allocations/skills-bootcamps-funding-allocations-2025-to-2026 providing training to over 40,000 learners. This is on top of £100 million over the next four years to expand skills bootcamps in construction, as announced at spring statement.

The Government are also launching technical excellence colleges (TECs) specialising in construction skills. Colleges will be able to apply to become construction TECs and the application process will open this term for 10, to launch in September 2025. These colleges will be leaders in delivering specialist skills, directly training learners and supporting other providers of construction skills across their regions—ensuring local people can benefit from this investment. They will serve as leaders in world-class skills training, combining excellent teaching standards with close working with industry experts.

Formal establishment of Skills England

These reforms will be driven forward by Skills England, which today becomes an Executive Agency of the Department for Education. Skills England will build our nation’s world-class skills, enabling growth and opportunity by:

Understanding the nation’s future skills needs and improving our skills offer.

Simplifying access to skills to boost economic growth.

Mobilising employers and other partners, co-creating solutions to meet national, regional and local skills needs.

To do this, Skills England will combine new functions with some of those previously undertaken by the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (IfATE). On 15 May 2025, the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Act received Royal Assent. This provided functions and assets to the Secretary of State that were previously held by IfATE, which has now been formally closed. These functions will broadly be exercised by Skills England and, combined with its broader work in the skills system, enable it to take its work forward as an Executive Agency of the Department for Education, with the approval of Cabinet Office and HM Treasury Ministers. Final accounts for IfATE will be presented to Parliament in due course.

The Government are also confirming board appointments to Skills England, and the latest analysis from Skills England is being published to help develop the Government’s understanding of skills needs and how they can be met.

The reforms announced today mark an important step in Government’s comprehensive strategy for post-16 education, delivering our youth guarantee, and our commitment to addressing skills shortages to drive growth while creating better opportunities for young people and adults across England.

[HCWS672]

Teacher Workforce

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

I am today providing an update on the steps we are taking to drive high standards for every child and deliver our promise to recruit an additional 6,500 expert teachers across secondary and special schools, and our colleges, over the course of this Parliament.

High-quality teaching is the in-school factor that has the biggest positive impact on a child’s outcomes, breaking down barriers to opportunity for every child, so recruiting, retaining and supporting expert teachers is central to delivering high and rising standards.

That is why, despite the challenging financial context and recruitment and retention difficulties for schools, this Government are getting on and delivering our plan for change. Delivery of the pledge started on day one of this Government and we have taken key steps over the past year to encourage more talented people to train to teach in schools and colleges, including:

accepting the School Teachers’ Review Body’s recommendation for a 5.5% school teacher pay award last year;

delivering a package of bursaries across schools and further education, and retention payments of up to £6,000 after-tax for teachers in shortage subjects;

enabling greater flexibility by allowing teachers to take planning, preparation and assessment time remotely;

supporting schools and colleges to utilise new technologies to help tackle workload and drive excellent outcomes for young people; and

streamlining the postgraduate teaching apprenticeship course to nine months so that it can be completed within one academic year, getting new teachers into classrooms quicker.

We are already seeing positive signs that our plan for change is delivering: this year 2,000 more secondary school teachers started training compared to last year, and additionally we are now forecasting 2,500 more primary and secondary teachers staying in the profession over the next three years. In FE we are also seeing positive signs with almost 6,000 approved claims for the targeted retention incentive payment, the majority in subjects critical to our plan for change, such as construction (1,700), maths (1,400) and engineering (1,200).

Today I am building on this by accepting in full the independent STRB recommendations for 2025-26, implementing a pay award for school teachers and leaders of 4% from September. This means school teachers will see an increase in their pay of almost 10% since this Government took power, and over 22% over the last four years. This will provide a competitive starting salary of almost £33,000, attracting talented graduates into the teaching profession, and we estimate the average teacher can now expect a salary of over £51,000 from September, helping retain talented existing teachers to deliver high standards for children.

I also recognise and value the vital role that school support staff play. The majority of these staff have already been offered a 3.2% pay increase through the National Joint Council for Local Government Services process from 1 April 2025, subject to agreement, and I thank them for their continued contribution to children and young people’s education.

I know it is important for schools to understand the implications of a pay award on their budgets as soon as possible. We have delivered on our commitment to confirm the teacher pay award substantially earlier than in recent years, and earlier than any year in the past decade.

Supporting schools and colleges

We recognise that this is beyond the costs for which many schools will have budgeted. Therefore, we are providing additional funding of £615 million this financial year to schools to support them with the costs of staff pay awards, on top of the funding already provided in their existing budgets. This funding has come from existing Department for Education budgets.

Alongside this announcement for schools, I am pleased to be able to announce that we will also invest an additional £160 million in financial year 2025 to 2026 to support colleges and other 16 to 19 providers. This will power our growth mission and enable these institutions to address the immediate challenges they face in recruiting and retaining the expert teachers so essential to delivering on our plan for change.

We have taken tough but fair decisions to ensure that every pound of taxpayers’ money is driving high and rising standards for our children. By ending tax breaks for private schools, and undertaking a robust line-by-line budget review to identify poor value for money spend, we are able to deliver this investment in recruiting and retaining more expert teachers in our classrooms. We have driven efficiency through increasing digital capability both inside and outside of the DfE, reducing central headcount and removing duplication within programmes.

As we have made clear throughout the pay process, we are also asking schools and colleges to do their part in ensuring that we are driving productivity across all areas of the public sector, ensuring that resources are deployed intelligently to maximise support for teaching and learning, freeing up educators to focus on what matters most: providing every child with the high-quality education they deserve.

Schools will be expected to find approximately the first 1% of pay awards through improved productivity and smarter spending to make every pound count. There will be those who say this cannot be done, but I believe schools have a responsibility, like the rest of the public sector, to ensure that their funding is spent as efficiently as possible.

Schools are already making savings and bringing core operating costs down: for example, the 400 schools who participated in the Department’s new energy for schools offer will save 36%, on average, compared with their previous contracts, which will free up vital funding to deliver for children and young people. We are also making plans to secure better banking solutions for schools, getting them better returns on their cash balances. Additionally, all schools will be able to access services, such as the “Get help buying for schools” service, to get best value when procuring goods and our teaching vacancies service to save recruitment costs. We will continue to provide them with additional tools, guidance and support.

We know that workforce deployment is the biggest component of school budgets. We will support schools to benefit fully from the tools we already offer to benchmark and integrate resourcing and curriculum planning, such as the financial benchmarking and insights tool. We will also introduce a new toolkit to support schools to adopt evidence-based deployment models. This will focus on data that helps schools identify areas for improvement and support to learn from best practice peers who are delivering strong outcomes for pupils with an efficient deployment model.

Beyond that first 1%, the cost of this pay award will be covered by the additional funding I am announcing today, on top of funding increases already in schools’ budgets for this year.

Building a modern profession

The teacher pay award is part of our comprehensive approach to reforming education while valuing those who deliver it. Teachers in our schools and colleges are shaping the lives of our children and young people every day. It is they who will deliver a broader, richer, cutting-edge curriculum that drives high and rising school standards and sets all young people up for life and work. It is they who are working hard in stuck schools where the reforms that we are introducing will deliver faster school improvement, alongside stronger accountability for all schools. It is they who manage the range of needs in inclusive classrooms. An excellent teacher in every classroom is essential for every child to achieve and thrive and to support pupils we are establishing 90 new RISE attendance and behaviour hubs.

We are further supporting talented experienced teachers to stay in the profession by taking action to promote flexible working in schools without impacting teaching time for pupils. By implementing flexible working, such as part-time working, personal or family days, or off-site PPA time, schools can support their staff’s working lives in modern, practical ways. This will support teachers to deliver the best possible education for children and young people. We will make it clear to schools that flexible working should be embraced by introducing a new reference to flexible working into the STPCD, making it clear that schools should aim to support flexible working requests where operationally feasible, while prioritising delivering the best possible education for children and young people.

I am also accepting the STRB’s recommendation on teaching and learning responsibility payments for school teachers. This will mean that from September 2026 at the latest, these additional payments will be paid to teachers based on the proportion of responsibility they carry out, rather than their contracted hours. For example, if a teacher undertakes the full role, they will receive full remuneration for this, but if they undertake only a portion of the role, they will receive remuneration in that proportion. I asked the STRB to look at this and I am pleased to be able to improve equality of opportunity for part-time workers, better enabling them to move into leadership roles.

We will continue to work closely with the sector to modernise and reform the profession. Later this year we intend to commission the STRB to look at specific reforms to teacher conditions, learning from innovative approaches that schools are taking to recruit and retain the teachers they need.

I would also like to thank the STRB for its detailed considerations this year on a range of other issues, which officials will take into account in future policy development.

Technical Annex: Further details on funding, the STRB process and recommendations

Funding details

We are providing schools with £615 million in additional funding in the 2025-26 financial year to support them with overall costs. Of this, we will provide over £470 million for mainstream schools, in respect of their five to 16 provision, through the new schools budget support grant; almost £85 million for special and AP schools; and almost £12 million for centrally employed staff. We will provide over £30 million for schools with 16 to 19 provision through 16 to 19 funding allocations. Over £15 million will be provided in respect of early years provision in schools. Mainstream and high needs rates and a calculator tool have been published to help schools understand how much funding they can expect to receive. Budgets for 2026-27 will be subject to the multi-year spending review.

Simultaneously, we are announcing £160 million to support colleges and other 16 to 19 providers with their strategic priorities, including recruitment and retention. Together, that means an additional sum of over £190 million will be distributed through 16 to 19 rates in the 2025-26 financial year. We expect to revise 16 to 19 allocations over the summer and to make updated payments from the start of the 2025-26 academic year.

STRB process, recommendations, and response

The 35th report of the School Teachers’ Review Body, responding to the remit issued in September 2024, is being published today. The report will be presented to Parliament and published on gov.uk. I will place a copy of this report in the Libraries of both Houses.

For 2025-26, the STRB recommended an increase of 4% to all teacher pay ranges and allowances. This pay award applies to all teachers in maintained schools. Alongside that, we are amending the provisions relating to TLRs so that, from September 2026, TLR payments must be based on the proportion of responsibility undertaken rather than pro-rated based on contracted hours. Schools will also have the option of implementing this change from September 2025. The Government are accepting these recommendations in full.

The STRB also gave its observations on broader structural issues relating to teachers’ pay and conditions. Following its report, from September 2025 the STPCD will be updated to reference that employers should aim to support flexible working requests where operationally feasible. Department for Education officials will consider the full scope of observations in future policy development.

The Department for Education will now consult all statutory consultees of the STRB on the Government’s response to these recommendations and on a revised school teachers’ pay and conditions document and pay order. The consultation will last for seven weeks, and the STPCD will be updated ahead of the new academic year, removing the need for schools to backdate the pay award.

[HCWS664]

Women and Equalities

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Thursday 24th April 2025 Written Corrections

The following extract is from the statement on the “For Women Scotland” Supreme Court Ruling on 22 April 2025.

[Bridget Phillipson]

… But this is a judgment long in the making. It began in 2018 when Scottish Ministers issued guidance on the definition of a woman in the eyes of the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018. That guidance stated that a woman in that Act bears the same meaning as a woman in the Equality Act 2010, and included trans women with a gender recognition certificate.

[Official Report, 22 April 2025; Vol. 765, c. 945.]

Written correction submitted by the Minister for Women and Equalities, the right hon. Member for Houghton and Sunderland South (Bridget Phillipson):

[Bridget Phillipson]

… But this is a judgment long in the making. It began in 2018, when the Scottish Parliament passed the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018. The definition of woman in that Act was overturned by the Scottish courts. Scottish Ministers issued revised guidance on the definition of a woman, which stated that a woman in that Act bears the same meaning as a woman in the Equality Act 2010, and included trans women with a gender recognition certificate.

Education

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Wednesday 23rd April 2025 Written Corrections

[Munira Wilson]

… While I welcome today’s announcement, will the Secretary of State commit to an urgent review of the rates paid for free entitlements to ensure that they cover delivery costs? Will she finally take this opportunity to recognise the deep damage that the national insurance hike is doing and ensure that early years providers are exempted? Finally, will she look again at the damaging guidance issued by her Department on charging and funding agreements?

[Bridget Phillipson]

… We also know that school-based providers have a greater share of the market in more deprived areas, and 34% of those announced today will serve disadvantaged communities.

[Official Report, 2 April 2025; Vol. 765, c. 337.]

Written correction submitted by the Secretary of State for Education, the right hon. Member for Houghton and Sunderland South (Bridget Phillipson):

[Bridget Phillipson]

… We also know that school-based providers have a greater share of the market in more deprived areas, and 32% of those announced today will serve disadvantaged communities.

[Ian Lavery]

I am delighted that the fantastic Ringway primary school in Stakeford, in my constituency, will be among the first in the country to host a school-based nursery. That, combined with the much-needed—and long in the planning—rebuilding of the school facilities will have an immeasurable impact on the life chances of young people in my area. Does my right hon. Friend agree that investments of this nature, mainly in socially deprived areas, will be of huge importance, and will she commit herself to rolling out further such schemes on my patch as soon as possible?

[Bridget Phillipson]

… I, too, am delighted that Ringway is part of the first phase of our school-based nurseries programme, and we are determined to ensure that there is more provision throughout the country. Of those that I have announced today, 34% will serve communities that experience disadvantage. It is important for us to ensure that all families can take up childcare and early years provision, and it is critical that we deliver those places.

[Official Report, 2 April 2025; Vol. 765, c. 344.]

Written correction submitted by the Secretary of State for Education:

[Bridget Phillipson]

… I, too, am delighted that Ringway is part of the first phase of our school-based nurseries programme, and we are determined to ensure that there is more provision throughout the country. Of those that I have announced today, 32% will serve communities that experience disadvantage. It is important for us to ensure that all families can take up childcare and early years provision, and it is critical that we deliver those places.

“For Women Scotland” Supreme Court Ruling

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Minister for Women and Equalities (Bridget Phillipson)]

With permission, I will now make a statement to update the House on the Supreme Court judgment in the case of For Women Scotland Ltd v. The Scottish Ministers.

This ruling brings welcome clarity and confidence for women and service providers. Single-sex spaces must be protected, and this is personal to me; before I was elected to this place, I ran a women’s refuge in the north-east for women and children fleeing domestic violence. I know how important to survivors it is, and always was, to have single-sex spaces based on biology —places of safety after trauma, time in a sanctuary that allowed them therapeutic support, healing from unimaginable male violence and fear. I remember how hard countless campaigners had to fight over many decades to get any single-sex provision at all, in order to create women’s refuges and rape crisis centres. Later, I remember how hard it was to convince commissioners that young homeless women trying to heal from terrifying acts of cruelty should not be left in mixed-sex accommodation. I will continue to fight for that provision to ensure that women’s safety, women’s privacy and women’s dignity are always protected.

This Government will continue as before, working to protect single-sex spaces based on biological sex— now with the added clarity of this ruling—and we will continue our wider work with commitment and compassion to protect all those who need it, right across society. This is a Government who will support the rights of women and trans people, now and always. This is a Government who will support the rights of all people with protected characteristics, now and always. This is a Government who will support the rights of our most vulnerable, now and always. On that, there is no change to announce: dignity and respect for all, now and always.

But this is a judgment long in the making. It began in 2018 when Scottish Ministers issued guidance on the definition of a woman in the eyes of the Gender Representation on Public Boards (Scotland) Act 2018. That guidance stated that a woman in that Act bears the same meaning as a woman in the Equality Act 2010, and included trans women with a gender recognition certificate. For Women Scotland challenged that guidance, saying that sex in the Equality Act means biological sex, so that a trans woman with a gender recognition certificate is a man for the purposes of the Act. The case was appealed to the Supreme Court, and last week, the court ruled that sex in the Equality Act means biological sex. This means that a person will be considered as their biological sex for the purposes of the Equality Act, regardless of whether or not they have a gender recognition certificate.

I know that the women who brought this challenge have not always been treated with the respect they deserve. This Government believe in freedom of speech and in the fundamental right to protest, but in no way does that extend to criminal damage. There can be no excuse for defaced statues of feminist icons, no excuse for threats, and no excuse for harassment. Such acts seek to drag down the debate, away from common sense and the sensible view—held by the majority of the British public—that women need single-sex spaces, that those spaces should be protected, and that we can protect those spaces while treating trans people with respect as well. As such, the certainty that this judgment brings is welcome. Now, it is time to move forward.

There is now a need to ensure that this ruling is clear across a range of settings, from healthcare and prisons to sport and single-sex support groups. The Equality and Human Rights Commission, as Britain’s equality regulator, is working quickly to issue an updated statutory code of practice to reflect this judgment, and I look forward to reviewing that code of practice in due course.

Alongside these updates, our work to protect single-sex spaces across society continues in earnest, because for far too long, under the Conservative Government, single-sex spaces were anything but—and nowhere is that clearer than in our hospitals. Year after year, the Conservatives pledged to close mixed-sex wards; and yet year after year, their use not only persisted but grew massively. Year after year, often in their most vulnerable moments, women were denied the privacy and dignity they deserved. Time after time, Conservative Ministers, including the now Leader of the Opposition, came to this House and toured television studios telling the public that they were protecting single-sex spaces in our hospitals. The truth was very different, because as last year’s data tells us, the use of mixed-sex wards rose by more than 2,200% in 10 years under the last Tory Government. There is no better example of rhetoric divorced from reality and of a party playing politics with the safety of women, and we will never let them forget it. By contrast, this Government will protect women’s wards and NHS England will soon publish guidance on how trans patients should be accommodated in clinical settings. We will end the practice of mixed-sex wards once and for all.

It is not just in our NHS that we will act on behalf of women. In prisons, we will continue to protect women’s safety with single-sex accommodation. In women’s sport, I have always backed integrity and fairness. Biology matters for competitive sport, and sporting bodies have issued rules to reflect that. In our prisons, in our hospitals, in sport and in a whole host of other spaces, what was true before the ruling remains true after the ruling. This Government protect safe spaces for women under the Equality Act 2010.

For too many years, we have seen the heat dialled up in this debate by the Conservatives. There was no real action to protect women’s spaces, while under their watch the use of mixed-sex wards increased, an epidemic of violence against women and girls spread across the country and women’s health was neglected. This Labour Government will deliver for women through our plan for change, driving down waiting lists month after month, tackling misogyny throughout society, and once and for all delivering justice for survivors of violence against women and girls.

I know that many trans people will be worried in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling, so I want to provide reassurance here and now that trans people will continue to be protected. We will deliver a full trans-inclusive ban on conversion practices. We will work to equalise all existing strands of hate crime, and we will review adult gender identity services, so that all trans people get the high-quality care they deserve. The laws to protect trans people from discrimination and harassment will remain in place, and trans people will still be protected on the basis of gender reassignment—a protected characteristic written into Labour’s Equality Act.

This Government will offer trans people the dignity that too often they were denied by the Conservatives. Too often, trans people were a convenient punchbag and the butt of jokes made in this place by the Conservatives, culminating rather shamefully in the previous Prime Minister standing at this Dispatch Box trying to score cheap laughs from his Back Benchers at the expense of vulnerable people. By contrast, this Government are clear that trans people deserve safety, opportunity and respect.

This verdict is about clarity and coherence in the eyes of the law, but the Supreme Court judges delivered along with that verdict a vital reminder: this is not about the triumph of one group at the expense of another. It is not about winners or losers, and it is not about us or them. That is the message I want to reinforce today in this House. Everyone in our society deserves dignity and respect. Those values are not and never will be a zero-sum battle. Dignity and respect for all—those are the values that lift us up and set us free. Those are the values that define and distinguish any modern and compassionate society. Those are the values that this Government will do everything to promote and protect, now and always. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Leader of the Opposition.

[Mrs Kemi Badenoch (North West Essex) (Con)]

I thank the Minister for Women and Equalities for advance sight of her statement, even if it was mostly a shameless work of fiction. I could not believe my eyes, or my ears, this afternoon.

In 2021 the Prime Minister said it was “not right” to say that only women have a cervix. In 2022 he said it was the law that “trans women are women”. In 2023 he said, “99% of women don’t have a penis”. I know what a woman is, and I always have. The people of this country know what a woman is. We did not need the Supreme Court to tell us that, but this Government did: a Labour Government so desperate to jump on a bandwagon that they abandoned common sense, along with the Scottish National party—which put rapists in women’s prisons—and, of course, the Liberal Democrats.

The Supreme Court ruling is a powerful victory for the determined women behind For Women Scotland, and for people all over the UK who know how important it is to give privacy and dignity to women and girls who need it, but it follows years of battle. Individual women took action to uphold the law at great personal cost, losing their jobs and their reputations. A few weeks ago I met the Darlington nurses who were forced to bring legal action after a male nurse started using their changing room. Even their union, the Royal College of Nursing, refused to represent them. Women should not have to battle the NHS or their employers through the courts.

Why has it been such a battle? Because something as simple as biological reality became politicised and corrupted by activists pushing this ideology as foolish politicians cheered. Even the Minister—who said in her statement that this was “personal” to her—stated just last year that men should access women’s spaces. Whether it is female victims in our courts being forced to refer to their male sex attackers as “she” or the NHS using confusing “gender-neutral” language, putting the health of women at risk, this is a serious matter.

At every point when we have fought for women, we have faced hostility from activist groups and the Labour party: in 2020, when we rejected Labour’s calls to introduce self-identification, and in 2021, when the then Home Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Witham (Priti Patel), ordered police forces to stop recording offences by trans women in female crime statistics. The current Culture Secretary, the right hon. Member for Wigan (Lisa Nandy), said that crimes committed by men should be recorded how they wished, and that those convicted of serious sexual offences should be held in jails that matched their chosen gender. It was crazy then, and it is crazy now.

I spent years battling abuse from Labour Members as I fought to uphold biological sex in government and blocked the SNP’s introduction of its mad self-identity laws, and I will take no lectures from them about what to do on this issue. Women and gay rights groups such as the LGB Alliance were even refused stands at the Labour party conference. The idea that Labour has supported this all along is for the birds. The Foreign Secretary described opponents of self-ID as “dinosaurs”. Labour now says that it knows what a woman is, and that transgender people should use services and facilities designated for their biological sex. It has never said that before, and this is a U-turn, but we welcome it.

Now that we have legal clarity, will the Prime Minister show some courage and do the right thing? Will he apologise to the hon. Member for Canterbury (Rosie Duffield), who faced so many security concerns as she was hounded out by the Labour party, and who was rebuked by the Prime Minister, and by many Labour MPs who are sitting there looking at me, for stating what the Supreme Court has now ruled to be true? Will the Minister apologise to the hon. Member for Canterbury? I doubt it. Will the Prime Minister crack down on the groups whom we saw defacing statues of suffragists over the weekend with the same energy that he reserves for his political opponents, or will we see more two-tier justice? Last time we saw Labour MPs standing next to them with no rebuke whatsoever. Will the Minister ensure that the Equality and Human Rights Commission has the Government’s full support in its enforcement of the code of practice? In particular, will she condemn the Labour Ministers who described Baroness Falkner’s entirely correct position on the judgment as “appalling”?

We need to root out gender ideology from our institutions. This Government now have a serious job to do, as many organisations will still fail women. I ask the following questions. As Minister for Women and Equalities, I published guidance for schools that made it clear that toilets and changing rooms must be provided separately for girls and boys, but the Minister scrapped that guidance. Will she stand up to the unions and urgently publish what she now admits is the law? She has also scrapped relationships, sex and health education guidance that would prevent schools from teaching contested gender ideology as fact. Will she now publish the guidance, and remove materials that mis-state the law? Will she act to stop passports and licences being issued with information on them about self-declared, rather than legal, sex? Will the Government support our amendments to the data Bill to ensure that digital ID systems record biological sex accurately? Finally, the Minister says that she is here to protect transgender people, many of whom were misled by Labour’s mis-statements on this issue. Some are now left very anxious. She has not provided any reassurance, and she should not use them as a shield to protect her failure.

This is not the end of the matter, but the beginning of the end. There is so much to do, and the Conservative party, under my leadership, will be relentless in ensuring that the Government do the right thing.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am delighted to see the right hon. Lady in her place today. Many would run from a record like hers on these matters, but not the right hon. Lady. She and the Conservative party had 14 years to provide clarity on the issues that they now claim to take an interest in. The Supreme Court has confirmed that Labour’s Equality Act 2010 is the basis for single-sex spaces and protection, but the Conservatives did not provide that clarity. Before I say a bit more about her record, I will say a little more about mine. I will come to the questions—[Interruption.] If the right hon. Lady has some patience, I will respond to her questions.

I have supported countless women and children fleeing appalling male violence, sexual violence and domestic abuse. I have campaigned for decades on women’s rights. I know more than most about the importance of spaces for women—I have fought for them, I have delivered them and I have run them. While I was running a refuge, and while Labour was delivering the groundbreaking Equality Act, which, as this ruling confirms, sets in law the basis for single-sex spaces, what was the Leader of the Opposition doing? Forever the keyboard warrior, she was busy hacking the website of the leading architect of the Equality Act, and she has learned nothing from her party’s crushing electoral defeat last year. She held the post of Minister for Women and Equalities for two years and did precisely nothing. She provided no clarity in the law and nothing to improve the lives of women, which got materially worse on her watch.

The right hon. Lady comes here claiming to speak for women, but let us look at her record and her party’s record. There has been an increase in stalking offences. Prosecutions and convictions for domestic abuse have nearly halved since 2015. The rape charge rate is at a record low. Survivors of sexual violence are waiting years for justice. There has been a 2,000% increase in the use of mixed-sex wards in only 10 years. That is the Conservatives’ record.

The right hon. Lady asks about the Equality and Human Rights Commission’s statutory code of practice. I have set out that I am expecting an updated version of that as soon as possible. I will work with the Equality and Human Rights Commission to implement the code of practice, to make sure that everyone has the clarity that they require, and I expect the EHRC to work quickly and thoroughly on this matter.

The right hon. Lady asks about gender-questioning guidance and RSHE guidance. I am afraid that too is simply laughable. Mere months before the election was called, the Conservatives published a version of the draft guidance for gender-questioning children. Since that time, we have had the final review by Dr Hilary Cass published. It is right that we ensure that the guidance aligns with Dr Cass’s final review.

On the RSHE guidance, the consultation concluded after the election. We could not be clearer that we will always protect single-sex spaces, and we Labour Members are focused on delivering for women. Whereas the Leader of the Opposition has described maternity pay as “excessive” and called the minimum wage “harmful”, we are improving protections for pregnant women at work. We are ensuring that women can take maternity leave and come back to good, secure jobs. We are expanding childcare, the first 750 new free breakfast clubs opened today, and we have brought forward the single biggest piece of child protection legislation in a generation to protect young women and girls.

It is Labour’s groundbreaking Equality Act that provides the basis for what we have set out today about single-sex spaces for biological women. This Labour Government have a plan for change; a plan that will deliver for women. It is time for the Conservative party to get offline and get on board.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Chair of the Women and Equalities Committee.

[Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)]

Far from this ruling providing clarity, trans, intersex and non-binary people are instead anxious and unsure about where this ruling leaves them, legally and practically, as they go about their lives. Does the Minister recognise that this ruling was made without a single contribution from trans people? Will she ensure that trans, intersex and non-binary people are involved in any upcoming new guidance, and if so, how?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I believe that this ruling provides much-needed clarity. I do recognise the Chair of the Select Committee’s concern about ensuring that all people are treated with dignity and respect, including trans people. My expectation is that the EHRC, in the development of the code of practice and the guidance, will engage with a range of stakeholders with different views, and will then set out that work in full.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

Order.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady. As she says, she has written to me on this topic, and I or a member of the ministerial team would be happy to meet her to discuss this further.

Where we can agree is that dignity and respect should be for all in our country—for women and for trans people—and trans people should not face discrimination or harassment on the basis of who they are. However, I believe that ensuring a society that treats everyone with dignity and respect is entirely compatible with ensuring that single-sex spaces can continue to exist for biological women who require safety and dignity, particularly following periods of terrible abuse. It is important that services are available for trans people in addition, and it is often the case that those services are much better provided by those with the specialist knowledge and expertise to deliver them.

I agree that this should not be seen as a conflict. The ruling from the Supreme Court, while being clear about the importance of biological sex, was at pains to stress that trans people do retain clear protections in law, and should be able to live their life free of harassment and discrimination.

[Catherine Fookes (Monmouthshire) (Lab)]

I have already been contacted by several LGBTQ+ and trans organisations in my constituency of Monmouthshire that are really concerned and frightened about the implications of this judgment. Will the Minister commit to meeting trans people from my constituency, such as those from Queerspace, Abergavenny Pride and Monmouth Pride, to hear their concerns about the impact of this ruling?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I note my hon. Friend’s concern, and I can assure her that I will continue to meet a range of stakeholders in this important area, because I agree with her that no one should face prejudice or discrimination because of who they are. That is why we are working with the Home Office to deliver our commitment to equalising all existing strands of hate crimes and making them aggravated offences. We will work right across this House to ensure that, while we maintain single-sex spaces for biological women, trans people have the support and respect they deserve, including in access to healthcare services.

[Shivani Raja (Leicester East) (Con)]

Will the Secretary of State take action to ensure that policies and lessons in schools are not led by external organisations that have been captured by contested gender ideology?

[Bridget Phillipson]

As I set out in my response to the Leader of the Opposition, we will publish revised guidance for RSHE. It is an important principle that parents should understand what is being taught to their children at school, and we will ensure that that is maintained.

[Emily Thornberry (Islington South and Finsbury) (Lab)]

Over the last few days, the number of calls to Switchboard, the national LGBT+ helpline in my constituency, has skyrocketed. The callers are in fear of what this ruling means for them. Trans people who are frightened to use public loos today know that the overwhelming threat to women and to all the trans community is the violence that we suffer from cis men. Does the Minister agree that we should all be clear about that?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree that male violence remains a very serious challenge that we face as a country, and it is a challenge this Labour Government are determined to confront. The ruling of the Supreme Court was clear about the importance of biological sex, but I would not want any trans person in my right hon. Friend’s constituency, or anywhere across the country, to be fearful. I believe that everyone has the right to be treated with dignity and respect, and should not face discrimination or harassment. That is why we will back the police in ensuring that action is taken against anyone who behaves in that way.

[Dame Harriett Baldwin (West Worcestershire) (Con)]

I would be grateful if the Minister focused on her Government and the future implications of this judgment. In her statement, she said that “NHS England will soon publish guidance on how trans patients should be accommodated in clinical settings.” I will read to her what the Worcestershire acute hospitals NHS trust has in its guidance:

“Patients should always be treated as the gender they identify as, regardless of what their transition looks like or how long they have shared their gender identity with others… Patients should always be in an environment that aligns with their gender identity.”

Would she say to this trust that it needs to act very quickly to change that guidance?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My colleagues and officials in the Department of Health and Social Care are in contact with NHS England to ensure that guidance is set out rapidly to provide the clarity required after the Supreme Court judgment. If the hon. Lady shares with me the detail of what she has just read out, I will happily make sure that that is investigated further.

[Preet Kaur Gill (Birmingham Edgbaston) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome the ruling from the Supreme Court and the Minister’s statement. The Supreme Court has been clear that “sex” in the Equality Act 2010 means biological sex. The question now turns to how we make sure that the Equality Act is properly understood and implemented. How will the Minister ensure that public bodies, third-sector organisations, sports bodies, regulated sectors and so on comply with the Act, so that women’s safety, privacy and dignity are protected?

[Bridget Phillipson]

As I said, we will work with the EHRC to provide further guidance to service providers, including through the update to the statutory code of practice. We expect the EHRC to do that as rapidly as possible, recognising that this is a thorough and detailed piece of work. But it is important that service providers, arising from this Supreme Court ruling, now have the clarity and confidence that was always there in the Equality Act 2010.

[John Lamont (Berwickshire, Roxburgh and Selkirk) (Con)]

The Supreme Court’s ruling goes a long way to guarantee the rights and safety of women and girls. Does the Minister agree that the judgment highlights why it is now right for the SNP Government finally to ditch the divisive gender self-ID agenda once and for all, and proves it was totally wrong for Scottish Labour to back the SNP Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My understanding is that the Scottish Government do not intend to progress their gender recognition reforms. My officials will work with the EHRC, which in turn will work with the Scottish Government. I believe that Scottish Ministers have indicated that they wish to engage with the EHRC on the guidance, which is an important and welcome development.

[Dame Meg Hillier (Hackney South and Shoreditch) (Lab/Co-op)]

I am proud to represent a constituency that shows tolerance to people from all backgrounds, unlike the political hot potato the issue has become in this place and in political dialogue. I have a constituent who transitioned in the 1970s. She has used female toilets for more of her life than any other toilets. Are we saying that her dignity and the respect the Minister talked about will be in any way improved if there is a ban on her using the toilets she has been using for so many years?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Supreme Court ruling made it clear that the provision of single-sex spaces is on the basis of biological sex, but what I would say to my hon. Friend and her constituent is that the development of the code of practice, which the EHRC will set out, will make sure that businesses and others will ensure dignity and respect for all, and that there is appropriate provision, including the use of toilet facilities, so that no one, including trans people, must feel unsafe when they use public toilets.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

Everyone must be able to access services with their dignity upheld and privacy respected, including women and trans people, but following the Supreme Court ruling many people are feeling confused and concerned. We must not allow it to lead to further heated arguments and toxicity. What steps is the Minister taking to develop the critical guidance needed to give businesses and public bodies clarity on how the ruling should be implemented, so that everyone is treated with the dignity they deserve?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

We will work with the EHRC on that guidance. It will present a revised code of practice, which I will review and present in due course. It is important that it does that as quickly as possible but, as I have said, this is a complex area and it must be undertaken thoroughly, with engagement with a range of stakeholders, including businesses, for the reasons the hon. Lady identifies.

[Charlotte Nichols (Warrington North) (Lab)]

Far from clarity, the verdict raises as many questions as it answers. Indeed, it has been referred to by the civil servant Melanie Field, who oversaw the Equality Act’s drafting and passage, as having significantly reinterpreted Parliament’s intentions. These questions are primarily about the purpose now of the gender recognition certificate and whether exclusion from single-sex spaces is merely lawful or required. But in protecting women’s spaces such as toilets from predatory men pretending to be trans women, what exactly stops those same men from now accessing them by pretending to be trans men?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I understand the concern my hon. Friend expresses and why she raises those questions, but I have to say to her that the position of the Government is that the Supreme Court has provided clarity and confidence in this area, particularly where it comes to single-sex spaces being on the basis of biological sex. The basis for that was the Equality Act, introduced by the previous Labour Government.

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

I am pleased to get the clarity from the Supreme Court judgment. Those of us on the Conservative Benches have always known what a woman is. The right hon. Lady says the Government will ensure that public services are fully compliant with the legislation, which is good. She talked about NHS single-sex wards and the provision for biological females and biological males. Can she confirm whether that means trans women will be cared for on male wards?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The basis for NHS provision, and the basis for single-sex services of all kinds, will be on the basis of biological sex.

[Marsha De Cordova (Battersea) (Lab)]

May I first welcome and thank the Minister for the measured way she delivered the statement, but also for her robust work on this issue? Last week’s landmark Supreme Court judgment provided not only clarity, but some long-overdue common sense. For too long, the issue has at times been toxic and has caused a great deal of harm to both women and trans people. Will she confirm that her Department is liaising with the EHRC to seek assurances that it will not only work at pace, but set some clear timelines on updating the statutory guidance? Will she also ensure that any guidance that is now unlawful is withdrawn?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I can give my hon. Friend the assurance that we will work as quickly as possible with the EHRC in this important area. I also think she is right to highlight the importance of good temper when it comes to different views on this topic, recognising that people have had strongly held views over a number of years and respecting one another, and, where we disagree, we do not descend into hate-filled rhetoric or involve ourselves in unfortunate and deeply regrettable protests, some of which have involved the defacement of statues. Now is the opportunity, arising from the Supreme Court judgment, to draw a line under this and ensure that the right guidance is in place and that there is clarity for all.

[Kirsty Blackman (Aberdeen North) (SNP)]

I appreciate the Minister’s words about reducing the temperature. An awful lot of people are hurting a huge amount this week as a result of the announcement. I appreciate the commitment to reduce the temperature and hope that everybody will sign up to that. The SNP welcomes the clarity offered on the definition in the Equality Act, notes the judgment’s points of interaction between the 2010 Act and the Gender Recognition Act 2004, and notes the commitment of the Minister and the EHRC to deliver as quickly as possible the guidance on the new code of practice. I would like to ask her if and when she will be replying to the letter, sent by the Scottish Government, seeking an early meeting with the UK Government. I urge her to undertake that meeting as soon as possible, please.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I would of course be happy to engage with colleagues from the Scottish Government. I will respond to that letter as quickly as I can.

[Cat Smith (Lancaster and Wyre) (Lab)]

I am very conscious that I represent many trans, intersex and non-binary constituents, and that the representations made to me in my office over the past few days have had a very clear message that they are feeling particularly victimised and quite scared for their own safety. Some are trans women and some are trans men, who seem to be very much lost from this debate. The one thing that really unites them is that they are worried about their day-to-day safety, so can I ask the Minister to provide some assurance to trans people right across the country that the Equality Act is still there and can protect them from discrimination and harassment?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. They retain protection from discrimination and harassment. I can say very clearly to this House that trans people should not be victims of discrimination or harassment. They deserve dignity and respect. That is why it is important that we also ensure that trans people have access to high-quality healthcare services and that we clamp down on hate crimes, including those targeted at LGBT people.

[Harriet Cross (Gordon and Buchan) (Con)]

I welcome the Supreme Court’s ruling and congratulate For Women Scotland and others who have campaigned tirelessly on this issue despite the abuse, threats and attempts to silence them. Will the Minister please confirm what discussions the Prime Minister or anyone on the Labour Front Bench at the time had with Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, when he whipped his MSPs to vote in favour of the SNP’s Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill? Do those on the Labour Front Bench now regret some of their previous decisions, when they sided against women across the country who were voicing their very real concerns?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

Where I can agree with the hon. Lady is that no one should face threats, intimidation or harassment for expressing their views—that is an important principle of freedom of speech in our country, but it should not cross a line. On the approach we take in Scotland, the leader of the Scottish Labour party has indicated that he welcomes and supports the Supreme Court judgment.

[Dawn Butler (Brent East) (Lab)]

I do not know whether anyone else in the House has butch lesbian friends and has been with them when they have been told to get out of women’s toilets, but I have—it is not pleasant; it is not nice. The people who are using this as a political football again should be ashamed of themselves. People do not understand: they are saying that trans women have to use men’s toilets and, as my hon. Friend the Member for Warrington North (Charlotte Nichols) said, trans men then have to use women’s toilets, but how will they stop them? Will they ask to see their genitalia? It makes no sense. Is my right hon. Friend aware that service providers for refuges, which provide a vital service for women in desperate need and often use their discretion, are now fearful that they will no longer be able to use their discretion when providing those services?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Supreme Court judgment set out that single-sex spaces are provided on the basis of biological sex. I do recognise the concern that my hon. Friend raises—lesbians should not be treated in a discriminatory way, and we must ensure that there are toilets and facilities available for everyone in our country. Additional clarity on the areas she has identified will be provided through the guidance the EHRC will set out.

[Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)]

In some ways, the biggest question today is why it took a Supreme Court decision to confirm this position in the Equality Act. I have heard from so many women who are considering standing as candidates but are reluctant to do so because of the toxicity in public life, and I think this debate is probably one of the most toxic in terms of misogyny. I am lucky: I am a man, and I have not experienced it to the same extent—nowhere near what women have experienced. Will the Minister take this moment to stand up for all women who have campaigned on this issue, reject the abuse and hostility that has been put towards them, restate the importance of their dignity and of respect, and thank For Women Scotland for the work it has done in taking this forward?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I do recognise the hon. Gentleman’s good intentions in asking that question, but I would say to him that, like many women in this House, I have experienced that too. We know what it is like as women to face that kind of abuse. We must recognise that there can be no place for such abuse in public life and that we have a responsibility to change that culture and climate and to encourage women to come forward and stand for elected office.

[Tonia Antoniazzi (Gower) (Lab)]

Since I have been in this House, I have felt the force of the lobby that has made people and MPs across this House stand there and say that trans women are women. Last week the Supreme Court said that sex in the Equality Act is actually biological sex, and I welcome that. What is the Minister going to do to deal with the type of damage that Mermaids and Stonewall caused to a generation, during 14 years of a Tory Government? What steps will she take to rectify the damage that they have done to a generation of trans and gender-questioning children?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I recognise my hon. Friend’s long-standing interest and campaigning in this area. She is right that the Supreme Court judgment provides clarity on biological sex. When it comes to support for gender-questioning children, when we are talking about children and young people, this has to be about their wellbeing. We are often talking about young people who are very vulnerable and experiencing real difficulties in their lives. The Hilary Cass review made it clear that young people in that situation need support and protection. That is why we will also publish revised gender-questioning guidance for our schools this year to provide that necessary further clarity.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

First, I would like to ask the Minister how we are all going to be asked to prove our birth sex. As the hon. Member for Brent East (Dawn Butler) said, this is not just about people who are transgender, non-binary and intersex; it is also about people who do not conform to gender stereotypes. One of my constituents has told me:

“It seems I am to be ghettoised into trans spaces”,

while another said that

“this ruling sends a message that trans people do not belong…however much we contribute”.

What does the Minister suggest I say to those constituents, and will she join me and the hon. Member for Bournemouth East (Tom Hayes) in meeting Dorset’s Space Youth Project for LGBT young people when it visits Parliament next week?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I would say to the hon. Lady’s constituents and to trans people across the country that the ruling was clear that while single-sex spaces are on the basis of biological sex, trans people retain protection from discrimination and harassment in law, and that the Government will always ensure that trans people have the dignity and respect they deserve.

[Nadia Whittome (Nottingham East) (Lab)]

Research shows that half of trans people already fear using public toilets, so I am deeply concerned about the impact of comments by the Minister and the Prime Minister’s spokesperson that trans people should use a toilet that many of them would not feel comfortable or safe in. Can I ask: how would trans people’s exclusion from the toilets they have long used be a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim, as the Supreme Court judgment and Equality Act dictate? Would the Minister like to clarify that there is, in fact, nothing in law that requires trans women to use men’s toilets, trans men to use women’s toilets, or non-binary people to use a toilet corresponding with the sex they were assigned at birth?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Supreme Court’s judgment was clear on biological sex, but I do understand and recognise the need to ensure that there is provision in place for everyone in our society, including toilet facilities. That is why many businesses and service providers provide unisex facilities, while many service providers will also put in place enclosed bathrooms that do not require people to make that decision to ensure that their dignity and privacy are respected. That is important for all people in our country.

[Dr Luke Evans (Hinckley and Bosworth) (Con)]

I have a practical question: does the ruling apply retrospectively? If, for example, someone was to have lost their job for their views or won a title in sport, would it apply retrospectively—yes or no?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I think the hon. Gentleman is referring to employment law cases, on which I would have to defer to legal colleagues. The judgment set out that the Equality Act 2010 is the basis for single-sex spaces being determined on the basis of biology. The Court determined that that was always the case and had always been the case since 2010—it was his party that failed to provide that clarity over 14 years.

[Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)]

The unanimous Supreme Court judgment has provided clarity over the application of the Equality Act 2010. It is incredibly important that hard-earned women’s rights and single-sex spaces are protected, while also protecting our trans community, who continue to face considerable discrimination; there needs to be a solution whereby they, too, are treated with dignity. Does my right hon. Friend agree that this entire issue needs to be handled with a great deal of sensitivity and sensibility, rather than being treated as a political football or a culture war issue?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree that the Supreme Court judgment provides much-needed clarity and certainty, including for service providers. I also agree that we need to ensure that this matter is handled with sensitivity; in particular, we have had a number of exchanges in this House where we have talked about children who might be gender-questioning and might be experiencing significant issues affecting their wellbeing. I want to make sure that right across society, women have the access to single-sex spaces that they need and deserve and, as my hon. Friend has said, they have long campaigned for. I also want to ensure that trans people receive the appropriate support, including healthcare, and do not face discrimination or harassment on the basis of who they are.

[Liz Saville Roberts (Dwyfor Meirionnydd) (PC)]

While the Supreme Court ruling brings clarity to some, it brings undeniable fear and uncertainty to others. The Minister’s statement today still leaves vulnerable trans people lost in a maze of complex equalities law. She talks about dignity and respect. Let us look at our prison system, which is just one setting for which her Government are responsible. It is dangerously dysfunctional. What safeguards will now be strengthened so that no trans person is placed in greater danger as a direct result of this ruling?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am afraid that I disagree with the right hon. Lady that the ruling was complex. It was straightforward and very clear, and has provided clarity that has been sadly lacking for many years. Of course it is important that vulnerable prisoners receive the support they need, but single-sex spaces are determined, as the Supreme Court has ruled, on the basis of biological sex. Where there are vulnerable prisoners, different situations may need to be put in place, separate from that arrangement.

[Chi Onwurah (Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West) (Lab)]

I am quite frankly astounded that the Leader of the Opposition seeks to portray herself as a champion of women’s rights when she has refused to recognise the reality of discrimination and harassment of women, and has stripped the funding from so many of the services that protect women. I pay tribute to the many Members of this Chamber who have worked publicly and privately to protect single-sex spaces and the rights and dignity of trans people. The judgment clarifies that single-sex spaces do not have to offer services to trans women, but can my right hon. Friend the Minister say whether they are obliged to refuse services to them?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Spaces that operate on a single-sex basis must do so on the basis of biological sex, but of course providers can offer inclusive services, should they choose to do so, so long as they are clear about who they are offering their services to. I agree with my hon. Friend that the last Government had a shameful record on the prosecution of rape and of domestic violence; at that time in this country, rape was all but decriminalised.

[Rebecca Smith (South West Devon) (Con)]

I am sure the Minister will recognise that there are many women, including former supporters of her own party, who voted for candidates like me entirely because of our record of supporting biological women. However, in the meantime, given that a number of trade unions claim that they will ignore the ruling of the Supreme Court, and in some cases even campaign against it, what plans do the Government have to ensure that all trade unions are made to recognise that the Supreme Court ruling applies to them too?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I do not know where the hon. Lady has been since July, but her party suffered a devastating general election defeat. That is why she is sat over there on the Opposition Benches rather than here on the Government Benches.

[Steve Race (Exeter) (Lab)]

Many of my trans, intersex and non-binary residents in Exeter and their relatives have been in touch with me to express their concern and fear after the decision last week. I know that my right hon. Friend mentioned this in her opening statement, but will she recommit to our ambitious agenda to advance the dignity and respect of trans people over the course of this Parliament?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I understand my hon. Friend’s concern. What I would say to his constituents and to trans people across our country is that we are working with the Home Office to deliver our commitment to equalise all existing strands of hate crime to make them aggravated offences. We will also bring forward a draft conversion practices Bill, in line with the King’s Speech and our manifesto, that will be trans-inclusive. We are clear that that ban must not cover legitimate psychological support, treatment or non-directive counselling, but we are clear that conversion practices are abuse and we will legislate to stop them.

[Carla Denyer (Bristol Central) (Green)]

Many people are feeling deeply worried about the Supreme Court judgment and what it means for their ability to live their lives in dignity and in privacy. Will the Minister make a commitment to uphold trans people’s fundamental rights, including the right to privacy, given that the Gender Recognition Act 2004 was created in part to do that? The Supreme Court ruling risks dismantling that by forcing trans people to out themselves multiple times a day whenever they visit the toilet, including in their workplace, in public buildings, or, indeed, in hospital.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am sorry, but I disagree with the questions that the hon. Lady poses. The ruling from the Supreme Court was clear, setting out that while single-sex spaces are to be delivered on the basis of biological sex, trans people must be free to live their lives free of discrimination and harassment and must retain clear protections within law.

[Olivia Blake (Sheffield Hallam) (Lab)]

The Minister will know that there is considerable concern and fear among transgender, intersex and non-binary people across the UK, including in my constituency. Will she outline what urgent steps the Government are taking to reassure my trans and non-binary constituents that it is their right to remain protected under UK law? What is she doing to ensure that the ruling is not misinterpreted or misused to undermine those constituents’ dignity, safety and access to services, and that it does not lead to discrimination on a wide scale, including through wrongly challenging people who are trying to go about their lives in our communities?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The rights of trans people are respected and retained following the Supreme Court judgment. The ruling was very clear about that, and it is important that we emphasise that point here today. Alongside that, we will ensure that hate crime is properly recorded and punished, because trans people and all people in our country deserve to live their lives free from discrimination, harassment and hate.

[Gregory Stafford (Farnham and Bordon) (Con)]

Patients deserve to be treated not only in single-sex wards, but —especially when they are having intimate examinations —by clinicians of the gender and sex that they wish. Is the Minister as concerned as I am about the General Medical Council carrying on with its policy to remove and hide biological sex from the medical register? What discussions is she having with the GMC and the other medical regulators about this issue?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree that it is important that patients have the right to single-sex provision, including around clinical treatment, but the hon. Gentleman might want to have a word with the Leader of the Opposition about the massive increase in the use of mixed-sex wards under his party in government.

[Zarah Sultana (Coventry South) (Ind)]

In Britain today, trans women are denied safe housing, refused essential healthcare and left waiting years for gender-affirming treatment. This is not accidental; it is the result of a climate of hostility against a marginalised community, fuelled by people in positions of power, including in this very Chamber. Let me be clear: trans people are not a debate, a culture war or an ideology; they are human beings, and trans rights are human rights. Will this Government ensure that they do not pander to hate? Will they reverse their damaging roll- back of LGBT+ rights, including the ban on puberty blockers, and unequivocally defend the Equality Act and the protections that it provides for trans people across the UK?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The hon. Lady asked a number of questions. What I can say to her is that trans people, of course, deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, and they retain rights to live their lives free of discrimination and harassment, as set out in the Supreme Court judgment. She asked about puberty blockers. I am afraid that there will be no change to Government policy in that important area.

[Richard Tice (Boston and Skegness) (Reform)]

Now that we have confirmation from the Supreme Court of what the definition of a woman is, can the Minister confirm that all public sector and private sector bodies will apply that definition with immediate effect?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Equality and Human Rights Commission will set out a statutory code of practice that will provide further clarity. But I would just say to the hon. Gentleman that I will take no lectures from his party about the importance of defending women’s rights, given that one of his own number who sits on those Benches was convicted of and went to prison for assaulting his former partner.

[Emily Darlington (Milton Keynes Central) (Lab)]

There are some days when I am really proud to be an MP and to witness the level of debate in this Chamber, and there are some days like today—when, quite frankly, the Leader of the Opposition was absolutely appalling. She continues to talk over people, to not listen and to laugh at people while they are talking about an issue that is very, very serious. People out there are scared as a result of this judgment. [Interruption.] Could you maybe let me speak? I apologise, Madam Deputy Speaker: will the Leader of the Opposition afford me the politeness of not speaking over me? My question, and I will ask a question—[Interruption.]

[Emily Darlington]

The debate we have in this Chamber is listened to by people who are scared. The behaviour of the Leader of the Opposition has been to talk over people and laugh at people, and when cis-men violence was mentioned, there was laughter on the Opposition Benches. That does not reassure women or trans women in this country. Does the Minister agree?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree that these matters are sensitive, and when we discuss them it generates strong feelings. It is, of course, right that we in this House are able to engage in robust discussion, including on issues that may at times be difficult. I accept my hon. Friend’s point: we do need to treat one another with respect and understand the need—

[Victoria Atkins (Louth and Horncastle) (Con)]

Follow your own advice then.

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

So much for dignity and respect, eh?

[Rebecca Paul (Reigate) (Con)]

I welcome the clear ruling from the Supreme Court, and I thank the Minister for her statement, but I am really disappointed that there was no mention of schools at all in the statement. Many schools are teaching gender ideology as if it is fact and are not providing single-sex facilities or single-sex sports teams. How will she ensure that schools now comply with the ruling and the law as it has always been?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I suggest to the hon. Lady that she review Hansard after this statement.

[Melanie Ward (Cowdenbeath and Kirkcaldy) (Lab)]

Following the welcome clarity from the Supreme Court that Labour’s Equality Act has always contained the right to single-sex spaces for women as well as protections for trans people, does the Minister agree that the SNP Scottish Health Secretary must urgently get a grip and ensure that the NHS is upholding the law, especially in my area of Fife where it appears that a nurse, Sandie Peggie, was disciplined by NHS managers for trying to exercise her right to use a single-sex changing room?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend will understand that I am not in a position to comment on ongoing cases, but I can say to her that I agree that the Supreme Court ruling demonstrated that the Equality Act introduced by the last Labour Government is the basis on which single-sex provision based on biological sex should be delivered.

[Tom Gordon (Harrogate and Knaresborough) (LD)]

The Minister says that the ruling provides clarity, but for the trans constituents I met and corresponded with over the weekend it provides anxiety and fear. Last week, a local media outlet, The Stray Ferret, published an article documenting a 60% increase in trans hate crime in the last decade in North Yorkshire alone. I and many others worry that the rhetoric and language around this issue will only fuel that. Can the Minister confirm how the Government will ensure that trans people, who are already disproportionately targeted, are not marginalised further and that the upcoming EHRC guidance addresses safety and inclusion as seriously as it does this legal clarity?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Supreme Court ruling was clear, but the hon. Member is right that there can be no place for hate or for people to be targeted on that basis. It is important that action is taken against those who perpetrate hate crime.

[Maya Ellis (Ribble Valley) (Lab)]

Like many of my colleagues today, I am truly exhausted by the cynicism of the culture wars around this topic. I hope we can focus on how we make any changes work practically. Does the Minister agree that all of us in this House should be mindful that human beings are affected by every comment we make on this matter, and that how we behave here will inform how the wider public behave, which I hope would be with kindness and compassion?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree that everyone in our society should be treated with dignity, compassion and respect. The Supreme Court ruling, while setting out its position on biological sex, was also clear that trans people retain important protections in law, including where it applies to discrimination and harassment. I do believe it is important that all of us share that message as we understand the ruling and make sure that it is well understood across our country. The last thing that any of us would want is for trans people to be fearful.

[Mr Richard Holden (Basildon and Billericay) (Con)]

I want everyone treated with dignity and respect, as the Supreme Court made clear should be the case. But should women have to rely on a court ruling, followed by guidance at some point from the EHRC, rather than the clear view of this House? What would be the Government’s view of having primary legislation in this area rather than relying on a court ruling?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Supreme Court’s ruling was that the Equality Act, which was passed by this House, is the basis for the protections that exist in law on the basis of biological sex.

[Mr Toby Perkins (Chesterfield) (Lab)]

I have had very constructive discussions with constituents on both sides of this debate. Does the Minister agree that those who seek to promote trans rights with sexually aggressive placards or through aggressively threatening women who disagree with them in the most disgusting ways, as we have all seen, do tremendous harm to the trans cause and should realise how counterproductive their slogans are to the cause they are attempting to promote?

[Bridget Phillipson]

No one should be targeted through vile placards containing abuse or hate. I agree with my hon. Friend; he is absolutely right that not only is it wrong, but it is completely counterproductive and does nothing to advance the discussion that those presenting the placards would wish to be advanced. While I understand that people have strong opinions in this area, it is important that any discussion or debate does not take us to hate-filled rhetoric, threats or threats of violence or intimidation.

[Neil O’Brien (Harborough, Oadby and Wigston) (Con)]

The Minister says that her position on these issues is very clear and has not changed at all over the years. She is promising to work at pace now, yet nine months into her time as Education Secretary the guidance on gender-questioning children that was consulted on over a year ago has still not been published. Will she help schools by answering this question: can it ever be right for a school to socially transition a child without talking to the parents first?

[Bridget Phillipson]

We will set out guidance this year for gender-questioning children. It is important, because—[Interruption.] I will answer the question. I will answer it directly if the Opposition Front Bench would just allow me a moment. We will publish the guidance later this year. I recognise the importance of providing clarity to school leaders. We inherited a draft version, and it was important that we looked at it and engaged with stakeholders following the final Cass review. But yes, I do agree that it is important that parents are involved in important decisions about their children’s lives. Alongside that, potential safeguarding considerations will always need to be taken into account. That is why we are looking at these areas very carefully to make sure that we get it right and we provide the clarity that schools leaders are quite rightly asking for.

[Chris Ward (Brighton Kemptown and Peacehaven) (Lab)]

The Minister is absolutely right that we need to conduct this debate with respect and compassion, because ultimately this is about people’s lives and their rights. That is why there is such concern in the trans community at the moment, including in my Brighton Kemptown constituency, which has the largest trans community in the country. Can she confirm two things for me? First, how will she ensure that trans people have faith that their existing legal protections will be upheld and not rowed back on? Secondly, how will the Government ensure that trans voices are heard as public bodies roll out their response to the ruling?

[Bridget Phillipson]

On the two areas that my hon. Friend asks about, trans people absolutely retain important protections in law, and the ruling of the Supreme Court puts that beyond doubt. To the question about ensuring that trans voices are heard, it will be important that the EHRC engages with a range of voices as part of its consultation in developing the code of practice that will be required to provide further clarity. I am confident that that will happen.

[Jim Allister (North Antrim) (TUV)]

Given that article 2 of the Windsor framework ridiculously requires Northern Ireland to be in dynamic alignment with EU equality directives, which include embracing self-identification, what steps will the Government take to ensure that this common-sense ruling of the Supreme Court is applied consistently and without adulteration across the whole United Kingdom now and always?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I will review the hon. and learned Gentleman’s question and write to him with a full response.

[Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)]

The Supreme Court asked that politicians not weaponise their interpretation of law set down by Parliament—it is almost like it had anticipated the Leader of the Opposition. The public are watching, and wherever they stand on this debate, they are not seeing a potential Prime Minister in the Leader of the Opposition.

Because trans people are worried and scared, it is important to give reassurance. The Supreme Court clearly said that trans people remain protected under the Equality Act, regardless of whether they have a gender recognition certificate. The Supreme Court said that it could not rule on the definition of a woman beyond its use in the Equality Act. My constituents who are trans and their allies are deeply scared. Will the Minister stand at the Dispatch Box and repeat her support for trans people in my constituency and around our country?

I repeat the invitation mentioned by my friend the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade). At my invitation, young trans people from Bournemouth and Dorset are coming to this place to know that this is their Parliament, that they have a place here, and that they will be listened to, respected and have dignity. Will my right hon. Friend or another Minister come and meet them?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

If my hon. Friend can provide me with additional details about his request, I will review that. I agree with him about the importance of reassurance that trans people should be free to live their lives with compassion, dignity and respect. The ruling of the Supreme Court made it clear that they retain legal protections; it is important that we all convey that.

[Graham Stuart (Beverley and Holderness) (Con)]

I thank the Minister for her statement and her emphasis on the need for sensitivity and indeed good temper in dealing with this topic. In that spirit, may I ask her to salute the courage of J. K. Rowling, Sharron Davies and indeed the hon. Member for Canterbury (Rosie Duffield)?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Over many decades, fantastic women have campaigned for the protection and creation of single-sex spaces, have fought against violence against women and girls, and have led some brilliant campaigns. I pay tribute to all those women—many of them are unsung heroes whose names we will never hear anywhere and will never be mentioned in the Chamber—for their fantastic campaigning efforts. It is only because of the amazing work of feminists from the 1970s onwards that we have rape crisis centres and women’s refuges.

[Tracy Gilbert (Edinburgh North and Leith) (Lab)]

I welcome the Minister’s statement and put on record my thanks to For Women Scotland for its tireless work over a number of years. It was the public face of many women who have experienced discrimination, abuse and personal loss for making the argument that the Supreme Court made last Wednesday. The Supreme Court held up the rights of lesbians to be able to associate with same-sex attracted women. What steps is my right hon. Friend taking to ensure that lesbians and gay men can associate without facing challenge?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Supreme Court ruling makes that clear and provides the clarity that many, including lesbians and gay men, have been asking for. The EHRC statutory code of practice will provide further clarity. But I agree with my hon. Friend that no one should have faced abuse, intimidation or harassment for expressing their legitimately held opinions.

[Sammy Wilson (East Antrim) (DUP)]

While the Scottish National party may see this as a judgment made by judicial bigots, most people will see it as a decision of common sense and will wonder why the courts had to decide what was a man and what was a woman. But given the intolerant, threatening and violent response from the trans lobby, will the Minister assure us that the judgment will not be undermined by the guidance she issues to the House and that vulnerable people, sports teams, hospital patients, teachers and children will be protected and not adversely affected as they have been in the past? Will she also assure us that it will be raised at the highest level of Government that Northern Ireland must be included in these protections?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Supreme Court judgment was clear, and it is welcome and necessary, but it also set out that the basis for protection for single-sex spaces is rooted in the Equality Act. Those provisions were always there, but now we have the clarity that many have been calling for.

While I note the right hon. Member’s understandable concern about the behaviour of a minority that crosses a line into conduct that is potentially criminal and certainly unacceptable, we do need to tread with just a bit of care not to lump everyone into that category; I am sure that was not his intention. While there can be no place for intimidation or threats, or threats of violence, people do have the right to express their opinions in line with our long-standing right to freedom of speech.

[Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Lab)]

The Equality Act is a vital piece of legislation that is there to protect the essential rights of oppressed groups, including women and trans people, in a world that is still far too dominated by sexism and bigotry, including transphobia. I used the Equality Act plenty of times to represent people as a lawyer before I came to this place. The House will no doubt discuss the impact of the recent Court judgment again, but as we look online and at some of the media, can we try to ensure that the debate respects all groups, including trans people? Some of the stuff spilling out of the right-wing press and online in recent days has been truly awful. That has been raised with me by trans constituents who are just trying to get on with their lives.

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Equality Act was one of the last Labour Government’s proudest achievements in ensuring that people are able to live their life free from discrimination, prejudice and harassment. I agree with my hon. Friend on recognising that important landmark piece of legislation. When we discuss what can be difficult and sensitive issues for some, we should understand that, as he said, people simply want to get on and live their life free from discrimination, harassment and abuse.

[Lewis Cocking (Broxbourne) (Con)]

In 2022, as I was sitting at Wormley community centre telling for the local elections, a woman said to me, “I’ve just voted Conservative because you are the only party that knows what a woman is,” so the British people really do care about this. Will the Minister be more specific on when she will issue guidance to schools about gender-questioning children?

[Bridget Phillipson]

As I have said on a number of occasions in the House, we will issue that guidance this year.

[Tristan Osborne (Chatham and Aylesford) (Lab)]

I welcome the clarification and statement from my right hon. Friend. The way in which she has dealt reasonably with questions in the House is testament to her fortitude and ability. A number of groups in my constituency have made representations, including Hilary Cooke from Medway Pride and women’s advocacy groups. There is a worry around some of the elements to do with harassment and discrimination—a concern that some might take an opportunity to target the trans community. Will she guarantee that Labour’s Equality Act will stand, and will prevent abuse, harassment and discrimination?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The Equality Act does stand, and it provides clear protections in law for women and trans people. It is important that women have access to single-sex spaces such as women’s refuges and rape crisis centres, but it is also important, of course, that trans people have access to high-quality healthcare and appropriate support services—and, in addition, can see the police taking action against hate crime.

[Lee Anderson (Ashfield) (Reform)]

A man is a man and a woman is a woman. Anybody watching this at home will think that the lunatics have taken over the asylum, which they quite clearly have. I do not need a Supreme Court judgment or ruling to tell me that a bloke should not be in a women’s changing room. I want to ask the Minister a simple question for more clarity: can a woman have a penis?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I tell you what: blokes should not beat up women. Maybe the hon. Member should have a word with his colleague.

[James Asser (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)]

The Minister will not be surprised to hear that I have had a lot of correspondence on this ruling, and there is great concern among the trans community about what the impact will be. There is also concern among the wider LGBT community that, in this populist age, the ruling may signal a move away from progress on LGBT rights. I therefore welcome her statement that there will be guidance. Will she ensure that that guidance is widely distributed, and is clear, so that it is understood? Will she also assure the LGBT community and the House that the Government and the Labour party stand four-square behind the advancement of LGBT rights, as they have long done, and that we will fight any attempt to row back on the progress of the last 30 years or the gains of the last Labour Government?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right to draw attention to the advances made over many decades in ensuring that LGBT people are treated with dignity and have the support and ability to participate in public life; frankly, many years ago, for many people, that was simply not the case. We have made enormous progress in tackling prejudice and discrimination, and this Labour Government will always ensure that whatever someone’s background, they will have every opportunity to take part in public life and achieve all that they are capable of. The Equality Act, which is one of the proudest achievements of the last Labour Government, enshrines in law the right to freedom from discrimination and harassment for women—and, yes, for trans people, too.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

May I thank the Minister for her answers and her statement? This ends years of confusion around sex-based protections. Being a woman is a matter of biology, not identity, and certainly not paperwork.

The judgment is welcomed by women, children and, I believe, many others. Does the Minister agree that it is not an eradication of rights for any person in this United Kingdom, but an underlining of protection? What discussions will take place with Cabinet colleagues to bring about an end to, for example, posters that use the terminology “birthing people”, and to other such phrases being used in the NHS, and to instead ensure a return throughout UK health trusts to the court-declared definition of a woman? Today is a good day for women, a great day for the law, and a wonderful day for people, and for truth.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree that the ruling of the Supreme Court was clear. That is important. It provides welcome clarity in a range of areas. On the issues that the hon. Gentleman identifies, such as access to healthcare treatment, it is for good reason that we make sure that there are sex-based services available for women, such as those who are breastfeeding, going through pregnancy and much more besides. Alongside that, we also need to make sure that healthcare is available and accessible to all.

[Jonathan Hinder (Pendle and Clitheroe) (Lab)]

We have made so much progress as a society in breaking down sexist stereotyping. The stereotypes that said women had set roles and should look and act in a certain way were being broken down, exposed as the fake construct they really are. Sex is the only factor that distinguishes men from women. Beyond that, we should be able to live without conforming to those stereotypes. Then a movement came along that argued that all those feminine, girly things and those sexist stereotypes we had been fighting to break down were, in fact, the things that make a woman, and not sex. That is regressive, backward and nonsensical. Will the Minister join me in saluting those courageous women who stood up and pointed out the absurdity of that argument, and commit to rooting out that ideology from our public institutions?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Over many decades, feminist campaigners, from the ’70s onwards, worked incredibly hard to ensure that women were able to divorce, that when that happened they were able to see their children, that they got protection at work, that they did not face discrimination, that they could access women’s refuges and rape crisis centres, and that rape was finally, back in the early ’90s, banned in marriage. I pay tribute to the amazing feminist campaigners and women over many decades who have brought us to a much stronger position, and to the brilliant trailblazers from across political parties who have ensured that we have far more women represented in this place than ever before.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

I want to thank the Minister for these remarks in her statement: “Dignity and respect for all—those are the values that lift us up and set us free. Those are the values that define and distinguish any modern and compassionate society.” Will she just reiterate one more time that when this Government talk about increasing the support for equality for all, that really does mean all?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right. This is about dignity and compassion for all, and that is an important message that I think we should all take out from this House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker]

For the final question, I call David Smith.

[David Smith (North Northumberland) (Lab)]

I thank the Minister for her clear and positive response to the Supreme Court’s ruling. Like her, before I was elected to this place, I ran a north-east-based homelessness charity for eight years. I have to say, contrary to what we have heard in some of the debate in the last few days and even in this place today, it is almost always possible to find a solution that allows us to support people on a single-sex basis and those who identify as transgender. In the last eight years of running that charity, I was not helped by the total lack of clarity from the Conservative Government. Does the Minister agree that it is important to reaffirm that in the Equality Act, trans people remain protected from discrimination under the protected characteristic of gender reassignment, and that the Supreme Court ruling is focused on clarifying protections, based on the protected characteristic of sex, that have always existed in the Equality Act?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is right in his assessment, and I pay tribute to him for his work over many years to support homeless people, including young people, across the north-east. I agree that it has always been possible to ensure that single-sex spaces were delivered on the basis of biological sex under the Equality Act, but I am glad that providers can now be absolutely confident and crystal clear about that.

One additional observation is that the rights we are talking about were hard fought and hard won, and there was significant push-back over many periods. My hon. Friend will doubtless have had the same experience as I did: commissioners suggested that mixed-sex accommodation was appropriate when, in many cases, we were talking about vulnerable young women who had been exposed to sexual violence, including sexual abuse in the home, and what they wanted and needed was single-sex accommodation. It is important that we ensure that appropriate services are available for anyone who needs them. That means that, on occasion, trans people will also require separate provision, so that their needs—their healthcare needs, their support needs, and their needs in cases where they may face abuse and intimidation—can be properly met.

Oxford Business College: Franchised Provision

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Tuesday 22nd April 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

I am today announcing that I have taken action against Oxford Business College, a private provider of higher education courses franchised by five institutions registered with the Office for Students.

My Department became aware last year of credible concerns about the recruitment and attendance of students on courses offered by the college, for which students are eligible for student support. I therefore commissioned the Government Internal Audit Agency to investigate these concerns, and have now received and carefully considered its reports, which have been shared with the college and its partners for comment.

It is clear to me that the management of recruitment and attendance at the college has fallen well short of the standards I am entitled to expect; this is unfair on those students who have genuinely wished to study. In particular, the investigation has not been able to provide me with assurance that students’ prior attainment, including their competence in the English language, has been adequately assessed, or that their attendance on their courses has been adequately monitored. I am aware that a number of the college’s partners have already terminated their agreements with it or have imposed additional controls.

I have therefore informed the college that new students on its courses will not be eligible for student support with immediate effect. The college’s partners have all told me that they have initiated planning for student protection, in conjunction with the Office for Students, which will allow genuine students to transfer to new courses. I recognise that this will be challenging, and have, therefore, allowed the college’s partners until the end of the current academic year on 31 August to complete those transfers, during which time the students affected will be able to retain their maintenance and fee support, provided they remain engaged with their studies. If they transfer, they will be able to receive funding to complete their studies.

These decisions reflect my determination to stamp out any abuse of the student support system. I will not hesitate to do the same again if circumstances justify it.

Last month, the Government set out the further steps they are taking to address concerns about franchised provision. This included asking the Public Sector Fraud Authority to help co-ordinate the cross-Government response to address the serious allegations I referred to in my statement on 25 March.

The Government consultation on proposals to strengthen oversight of partnership delivery in higher education closed on 4 April. The responses to this consultation are being considered carefully to ensure that the Government response will be effective in preventing abuse of student support and poor quality in franchised provision. I will update parliament when the Government response is published.

[HCWS591]

School-based Nursery Capital Grants

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Wednesday 2nd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

With permission, I will make a statement to update the House on the roll-out of nurseries in our primary schools.

This Labour Government are bringing the change that families deserve. We made promises to the parents and children of this country and, not nine months in, we are acting to deliver on them. Free breakfast clubs are already being rolled out, the curriculum and assessment review is in full swing, and children’s social care is seeing the biggest overhaul in a generation. We have funding for 10,000 new places for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities, backing for up to 10,000 more apprentices to qualify, new improvement teams for our schools and a new allowance for our kinship carers—promises made, promises kept. Here, today, we go further.

This £37 million in funding for 300 primary schools to open and expand nurseries is a big step towards delivering 3,000 nurseries for schools, a big step towards delivering childcare for parents and a big step towards delivering the best start in life for all our children. I want that best start in life for every child, because I want opportunity for every child. I want every child in every village, town and city across our country to grow up knowing that success belongs to them. That is the kind of country I want to live in—the country that this Labour Government want to build, with opportunity not just for some, but for all our children.

To achieve that, we need to start early, before university or college, and even before school—in the earliest years of our children’s lives. Those years are fundamental to opportunity. That is where gaps in learning and development first appear, and the longer we wait, the wider they grow and the harder they are to close. That is why, when I am in schools, colleges and universities—even in those places—they agree that the biggest chance to make an impact on our children’s lives sits in those crucial early years. That is why this is my No. 1 priority.

If we get this right, and we set all children on the track to success, that is where they will stay. That is why, despite the huge fiscal challenges that we inherited from the Conservatives, we chose to invest more than £8 billion in the early years at the last Budget. It is why the early years are a central part of the Prime Minister’s plan for change, setting the target of a record share of children starting school ready to learn. That is why I am today announcing the 300 schools that will be delivering our first wave of new and expanded school-based nurseries. Many of these school-based nurseries will serve communities facing big challenges, where there is strong evidence of need. Overall, it means up to 6,000 more nursery places for young children where they will have the biggest impact, with most of them starting in September this year. That is vital, because that is when the final stage of the 30 hours a week childcare entitlement will kick in. When that is joined up with the offer for three and four-year-olds, working parents of children from nine months right up to the beginning of school will get 30 Government-funded hours of childcare a week.

The 300 schools are just the start. It is 300 on the road to 3,000 school-based nurseries. We will work with schools, voluntary and private providers, teachers and local partners to find and spread what works. By the end, it will mean that tens of thousands more parents have the power to choose the hours they want to work.

What a contrast with the Conservatives, because what we inherited was not just an offer that they had not bothered to fund, but a pledge without a plan, with places, promises and provision missing. Parents made decisions on the back of those promises. Again and again, I hear from parents how much they have been relying on the promises that the previous Government scattered about like confetti. Across our country, this Government are delivering change in months, when the last Government waited 13 years before signing a post-dated cheque.

The changes that we are making will give parents more control over their lives, time to choose their working hours and money back in their pockets. The last Coram report showed that the effects are starting to flow through. Childcare costs for under-threes in England have halved since the expansion, but ultimately childcare and early years education is about children. It is about launching a lifetime of learning and starting as we mean to go on, so as we roll out these school-based nurseries, we are also adding the biggest ever uplift to the early years pupil premium, closing the attainment gap and giving every child the support that they need to learn and grow, and we are supporting early years educators to build their expertise.

It is not just what is taught in those nurseries that counts, but where they are located: they are in primary schools, which is no accident. We are centring schools in their communities, starting early, working with the voluntary sector and private providers too, so that the move from nursery to school is a natural step, from one room to another, sometimes even in the same building, as is the case at St Anne’s church academy in Weston-super-Mare. Having a nursery on site means that stronger, longer lasting relationships with families can be built. Parents feel that they are part of the community, so they engage more when their child starts nursery and then moves into school. When their child starts reception, there are no big, scary changes, building the sense that school is where they are meant to be.

I saw that powerfully this week when I went to Peterborough to visit Fulbridge academy. Little Oak nursery sits at the heart of the school. While I was there, I spoke to Hannah, a working mum whose little boy, Nile, goes to the nursery. She told me all about the difference that Little Oak was making to her family, and about how her son is making friends and taking big strides in his learning, ready to join his two older siblings at school in September. The nursery plays a big part in making Fulbridge academy the centre of that community.

It is the same for free breakfast clubs, which is why we announced the 750 early adopters this year. Schools are the beating hearts of their communities, where children come together to eat, learn and grow. It is good for attendance and achievement, for behaviour and belonging, and for children and their life chances. That is the point: this is action for them, to give them the start that they deserve, because that is my No. 1 priority, built on a deep and fierce commitment to the children of this country in the first years of their lives, taking their first steps into the world.

In our youngest children’s faces and in the faces of all who work with them, we see something that for so long has been missing from our country: hope. We see the hope of a brighter and better future, the hope of a secure and prosperous world, the hope that tomorrow can be better than today and the hope that this is a Government that are on their side. That is the future that we shape together, not face alone. That is the hope that so many people in our country have—that our best days lie ahead of us. That is what the people of this country chose in the general election last July, when they chose hope over fear, and chose a brighter tomorrow, not a bitter yesterday.

And that is why I am so focused on getting on and delivering change, because it matters so much for lives now, not in some distant future. Early years are where futures are made, where life chances are won and where healthier societies are built. That is the prize on offer. Our youngest generation is the first generation for whom opportunity is open to all, right from the start, and I know that Members from across the House will agree that that is a prize worth fighting for. I commend this statement to the House.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Laura Trott (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

We welcome the Education Secretary’s announcement, but let us be absolutely clear: the policies that she is talking about represent investment of £37 million, but the Government are taking away half a billion pounds from nurseries by failing to compensate them for the national insurance increase. That will have a catastrophic effect on nurseries up and down the country, which will be forced either to close or to put their prices up. “Catastrophic” is not my word, but that of the Early Years Alliance, following Labour’s national insurance bombshell on the childcare sector.

In her statement, the Education Secretary said that she inherited a “pledge without a plan”—what a load of nonsense! It is our plan that is delivering the expansion of funded childcare this autumn, and our plan that she today confirmed has already halved costs for under-threes, according to independent research. That is our plan, Madam Deputy Speaker, but it is her plan that is shutting nurseries up and down the country, and that will put up costs for parents.

Just last week, I hosted a roundtable with some of the unsung heroes of the sector—nursery owners. Many were in tears, struggling with very real decisions about whether they can keep their doors open. One of the owners shared with me that she is stopping her own salary so that she can continue to pay her staff the amount they deserve. Another owner was having sleepless nights worrying about how she would provide proper care for the children now that she can no longer afford the staffing costs, thanks to this Government’s decisions.

It is clearly absurd for the Government to ask the sector to absorb the increases in national insurance while keeping fees the same. The consequences of that are entirely predictable: nurseries will have to either close or put up their prices. A recent survey by the Early Years Alliance said that, sadly, around 400 nurseries that it spoke to may have to close because of this Government’s jobs tax. That is what the Education Secretary’s No. 1 priority looks like. Parents will lose out too. According to the National Day Nurseries Association, increases to national insurance contributions will force nurseries to raise their fees by 10%. Those are the obvious consequences of this Government’s decisions.

Will the Education Secretary finally admit today how much the jobs tax is costing the childcare sector? Will she monitor the impact of closures that happen thanks to her jobs tax on childcare availability? On the specifics in her announcement today, will she confirm the locations of the school-based nurseries and how they were chosen? Were they chosen on the basis of surplus primary places or are they in areas where we need more childcare provision? If it is the latter, how were they identified?

Those nurseries will be based in schools, so is it her intention that they will mimic the school timetable, or will there be year-round provision and will their hours be longer than the school day? Will school-based nurseries be compensated for the impact of the jobs tax? If so, what will she do to address the inequity that that will cause with other providers?

As the Early Years Alliance has said today

“if the government is truly serious about breaking down barriers to opportunity, it must come to the realisation that increasing school-based provision can only ever be one piece of the puzzle. Failing to recognise this will simply mean that more families lose out.”

It is right: under this Government, more families will lose out.

While I welcome the Education Secretary’s announcement, the reality is that Labour’s decisions are making childcare more expensive and harder to find—[Interruption.] Hard-working families will bear the brunt of this Government’s failure. It is time for the Education Secretary to stop making broken promises and actually make early years her No. 1 priority.

[Bridget Phillipson]

It must be profoundly draining for the right hon. Lady to come to the Chamber when faced with such good news and to bring such studied, forced negativity every single time. Six weeks ago, I was in the House delivering the news that we are supporting hundreds of schools across our country to open free breakfast clubs, and we got much of the same studied, forced negativity then. Today, not nine months into this Government, we are beginning the roll-out of school-based nurseries, as we have promised to the people of this country—[Interruption.]

I spoke about visits, and the hon. Member for Harborough, Oadby and Wigston (Neil O’Brien) should go and visit the school-based nursery that will shortly be opening in his constituency. I never hear from Conservative Members that they will be visiting those nurseries or breakfast clubs, so maybe they could take time out of their busy schedules to go and do precisely that. The only priority that they have is to bring back tax breaks for private schools, taking away resources from our state schools. That is the one idea that they have. Their idea of fresh thinking is to spend money they did not raise on plans they did not make.

On the questions asked by the right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott), we are investing £8 billion in expanding early years entitlements, alongside doubling the early years pupil premium, a £75 million expansion grant and compensation for school-based nurseries. The contrast between this Government and the Conservatives is like night and day. I am proud that at the Department for Education, under a Labour Government, it is week in, week out the Department for hope—the hope of a brighter and better future for our children and our country.

We have free breakfast clubs, a cutting-edge curriculum for all our children, the biggest overhaul of children’s social care for a generation, funding for up to 10,000 new school places for children with special educational needs and disabilities, backing for up to 10,000 more apprentices to qualify, new improvement teams in our schools, a new allowance for kinship carers and new support for expanding foster care. That is the difference between this Labour Government and the Conservatives. We are the party of hope. If the Conservatives’ recent leadership contest was anything to go by, they cannot decide if they are the party of fear or the party of despair.

[Amanda Martin (Portsmouth North) (Lab)]

Early years is another strand of education that was decimated by the last Government. Although those on the Conservative Benches have not valued this sector, as a former teacher, a mum and now an MP, I know its value for children and families in our communities. Although in Portsmouth we do not have one of the 300 nurseries announced in today’s first wave, I commend the Government on this initiative. I take this opportunity to commend and praise all those who work in the sector, providing opportunities for the young people in my city. I thank them for their fantastic work. I also take this opportunity to ask the Secretary of State to update the House on delivery of the planned September 2025 childcare expansion, and to explain how she expects parents to benefit from the 30-hours roll-out across the fabulous nurseries in my city.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, who brings real expertise to this place, through her background and wealth of experience in education. Through the expansion that we are rolling out this year, parents will see considerable savings, but crucially it will ensure that all our children get the best possible start in life. While I recognise her disappointment that her own constituency did not benefit this time around, I note that Portsmouth South secured a school-based nursery this time around. Of course, this is only phase 1 of what will be a wider roll-out as time progresses.

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Caroline Nokes)]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

Access to flexible, high-quality early years provision gives children the start they deserve and parents the choice they need to live their lives, and it is one of the best possible investments we can make in the future of our country. For those families living in childcare deserts left by the previous Conservative Government, today’s announcement will be welcome news.

I welcome the sorely needed uplift in the early years pupil premium, but school-based nurseries can only ever be part of the puzzle. We will never fix the crisis in early years without fixing the deep problems facing private and charitable providers. They deliver the vast bulk of the Government’s free entitlement, yet they face some of the toughest challenges in making ends meet. The Government’s national insurance hike, the failure to ensure that rates actually cover delivery costs and damaging guidance to local authorities on funding agreements, which came into effect this week, mean that many are struggling to stay afloat. We have already heard that the Early Years Alliance survey found that four in 10 said they would reduce their number of funded places for three-year-olds and four-year-olds in the next year. Some 94% said they would be forced to raise their fees for parents for non-funded hours, and almost a third said they were likely to permanently close. Can the Secretary of State tell me how that is extending choice for parents? Building Blocks nursery in Teddington in my constituency is now operating at a loss and faces some incredibly painful decisions that will hurt parents, children and staff.

While I welcome today’s announcement, will the Secretary of State commit to an urgent review of the rates paid for free entitlements to ensure that they cover delivery costs? Will she finally take this opportunity to recognise the deep damage that the national insurance hike is doing and ensure that early years providers are exempted? Finally, will she look again at the damaging guidance issued by her Department on charging and funding agreements?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to the hon. Lady. Like her, I pay tribute to the big range of providers that play a crucial role in supporting our children’s early education. That extends to private voluntary providers and childminders, who are a crucial part of the sector. The announcement we are making today on school-based nurseries is designed to deal with many of the challenges that she identifies arising from the childcare deserts left behind by the Conservatives. We also know that school-based providers have a greater share of the market in more deprived areas, and 34% of those announced today will serve disadvantaged communities. Alongside that, I note that the hon. Lady welcomes the biggest ever uplift that we have secured in the early years pupil premium, which will make a big difference to the life chances of children from more disadvantaged backgrounds. When it comes to the rates, we will always continue to keep those under review.

The hon. Lady asks about the charging guidance that has been issued. I believe it is important that parents have greater transparency when it comes to charging and fees, and where they are able to exercise greater choice in what is being offered to them. I believe that is the right approach, not least as we move towards a system in which the vast bulk of childcare is backed by Government.

[Peter Dowd (Bootle) (Lab)]

I have seen more Tory MPs changing a lightbulb than there are in the Chamber today. I welcome the statement from the Secretary of State—as does Thomas Gray primary school, a very good school in my constituency; the parents and children do a fantastic job there—and I thank her for it. Does she agree that, quite simply, actions speak louder than the many words the Opposition say?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend. Like him, I pay tribute to the amazing staff working right across education in our schools and nurseries for the vital work they do.

[Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)]

I like the right hon. Lady, and I really enjoyed her sunlit-uplands speech—anyone would think there was a leadership contest on in the Labour party. I did not quite hear the answer to the question from my right hon. Friend the Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott) about the way in which the increase in national insurance contributions will hit all nurseries at once, whereas at the moment we are getting an initial tranche of 300 out of an intended 3,000 new arrangements for her announcement to be fulfilled. Over how long a period does she expect to get from 300 to 3,000?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman likes a bit of hope and optimism; I think we could all do with a bit of hope and optimism in the current world. The leadership contest I am really looking forward to is the one that we are going to see very soon in his own party. It will be a treat for all of us in this House, although I hope it does not happen, because I would much prefer for things to carry on just as they are.

I note the questions that the right hon. Gentleman asks. We have secured an extra £2 billion in the Budget, taking the total to £8 billion for early years entitlements. In addition, we have a £75 million expansion grant, compensation for public sector employers and, alongside that, the biggest ever uplift in the early years pupil premium. We are working very closely with the sector to deliver the places and the staff required, and we will continue to do so in the months ahead.

[Neil O’Brien (Harborough, Oadby and Wigston) (Con)]

Answer the question!

[Bridget Phillipson]

In answer to the question, this is the first phase, and we will roll out the 3,000 over the course of this Parliament.

[Katie White (Leeds North West) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome the refocusing on early years by this Government, and I also welcome the school-based nursery announcements today; I am particularly excited about the one at Tranmere Park primary school in Guiseley in my constituency. How many children do we think will be affected by this announcement, and how many parents will benefit from it?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend, and I look forward to the extra places that will be available in her constituency to serve local families. What we are setting out today will create 6,000 new childcare places, most of which we expect to be available from September 2025. We are moving rapidly to support schools to put in place the spaces for children that we know are required.

[Manuela Perteghella (Stratford-on-Avon) (LD)]

Behind capital funding, what gives children the best start in life is the people, such as early years practitioners, teachers and teaching assistants. The early years sector is struggling with a crisis in recruitment and retention, especially in rural areas such as my constituency. That leads to fewer places for children and higher costs for families. What steps are the Government taking to address the lack of resources, skills and experience in schools and other early years sectors for delivering high-quality education to under-threes?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with the hon. Lady that it is the brilliant people working in early years education who make the biggest difference to our children’s life chances. Of course, we need to put the capital in place to create the physical provision, but it is the people who deliver it who matter the most—I know that the hon. Lady brings expertise in that area to this House. I agree that there is more to do to support the workforce, but we have already taken important steps to support the sector to recruit and retain more staff ahead of the final phase of the roll-out. We have also recently introduced an experience-based route to working in the sector at level 3 and have published the early years teacher degree apprenticeship standard, a new undergraduate route to early years teacher status. Later this year, we will set out more details on wider reform, including looking at the questions about workforce that the hon. Lady has raised.

[Grahame Morris (Easington) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome the statement from my right hon. Friend and neighbour. I particularly welcome the fact that Yohden primary school in my constituency—one of the most deprived and disadvantaged communities not just in the county, but in the country—will benefit. That is tremendous news, but can my right hon. Friend outline the Government’s timetable and commit to expanding the scheme still further, so that parents across my constituency and others can look forward to an improvement in childcare provision?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I join my hon. Friend in sending my best wishes to the staff at Yohden primary school, and I recognise the important work that they do to support families and children from more disadvantaged backgrounds. This announcement is an important first step in the Government’s ambitious plan for change, breaking the link between background and success, and making sure that a record proportion of children start school ready to learn. This is the first phase of what we intend to do, but there is more to come right throughout this Parliament.

[Julia Lopez (Hornchurch and Upminster) (Con)]

On Friday, I met 20 incredible women running nurseries and pre-schools in Havering. They contacted me because they are in utter crisis. Business rates, national insurance and wage bills are all rising, while the Government cap what they are allowed to charge and then do not cover the cost of the free childcare hours being offered. Fees are going up, and nurseries are now at risk of mass closure. The Education Secretary is driving private nurseries to the brink while not providing enough school-based ones to fill the gap, and I am afraid that her talk of hope is absolutely delusional. As a parent with two small children who speaks regularly to the women running those nurseries, watching Labour Back Benchers jeering the shadow Secretary of State for asking questions is absolutely disgusting. What urgent action is the Education Secretary taking to prevent a meltdown in childcare that is going to affect working families across this country?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I, too, speak to early years providers, schools, nurseries and childminders right across our country on a regular basis, unlike Conservative Front Benchers, who seem to spend most of their time complaining about announcements that this Labour Government are making. I also pay tribute to the early years workforce and the staff in the hon. Lady’s constituency for the important work that they are doing. As I have said in a number of answers, we have set out £8 billion in funding, alongside the biggest ever uplift to the early years pupil premium and a £75 million expansion grant to create the places that are required, and that is on top of the £37 million of capital funding that I have announced today.

[Natasha Irons (Croydon East) (Lab)]

I welcome this Government’s continued commitment to breaking down barriers to opportunity, and I welcome the investment in the nurseries at Monks Orchard primary school and Fairchildes primary school in my constituency—I visited Fairchildes earlier in the year, and I know that that money will go to very good use. Does the Secretary of State agree that accessible childcare is essential support for all families, and can she outline how today’s announcement will help to boost household incomes?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am delighted that my hon. Friend has been able to see at first hand in her Croydon constituency the impact that this funding will have on families. It will support us in ensuring that a record proportion of children arrive at school ready to learn, and will make a significant difference in supporting families and child development. Critically, as my hon. Friend identifies, it will also put more money directly back into parents’ pockets—the figure is £7,500.

[Helen Maguire (Epsom and Ewell) (LD)]

I welcome the Government’s announcement today, but not every parent needs a full childcare place; many just need somewhere to go with their child, especially in the early months, as parenting can be an isolating and overwhelming experience. What are the Government doing to support community-based options such as one o’clock clubs and the Sure Start centres, which provide vital spaces for parents and children alike?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree about the importance of family support services, especially for our youngest children. The hon. Lady mentioned Sure Start; that was a proud achievement of the last Labour Government, and when her party was in coalition with the Conservatives, we saw Sure Start centres close right across the country. However, she makes a fair point about the support that is required in the early years, which is why we are doing more, and will do more in the months ahead. While access to early education is a critical part of what many families want, alongside access to high-quality health visiting and speech and language support, community provision is also critical. That is why I am working very closely with the Health Secretary to ensure that all families have good access to both education services and health and care services.

[Damien Egan (Bristol North East) (Lab)]

I would like to express my gratitude and welcome this news today. Two new nurseries will be opening in Bristol North East, the Tynings school in Staple Hill and Avanti Gardens in Fishponds, both areas that have lots of young families but not enough nursery provision. Can the Secretary of State reassure other families in Bristol North East and across the country that this announcement is just the start, and that under a Labour Government, we will see lots more nursery places opening?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

Parents in my hon. Friend’s constituency will be able to benefit now from the expansion of school-based nurseries, but this is just the start. Alongside the expansion in primary schools that I have set out, we are working very closely with private and voluntary providers and with childminders to deliver the places that families in my hon. Friend’s constituency and across the country were promised by the Conservative party, but that this Labour Government will deliver.

[Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)]

Emma, who runs a nursery in the small village of Sayers Common in my constituency, wrote to me recently about the impact of national insurance rises. I recognise that today’s announcement is focused on really deprived areas, and I can see that two primary schools in Crawley in West Sussex that will benefit. That is a town with proper deprivation, but deprivation also exists in rural areas, and I am worried that today’s announcement is giving with one hand to deprived urban areas, but taking away with the other by hammering nurseries in our rural villages with increased national insurance contributions.

[Bridget Phillipson]

I can assure the hon. Lady that the list of schools announced today covers constituencies the length and breadth of our country, serving constituencies both urban and rural. I recognise her point about ensuring that there is good, adequate provision in our rural communities as well, and if she wants to share Emma’s letter and experiences with me, I would be happy to respond.

[Mary Glindon (Newcastle upon Tyne East and Wallsend) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for investing in Battle Hill primary school in the ward in which I live, where I was proud to be a school governor for 20 years. Does she agree that investing in nurseries in deprived areas such as Battle Hill is essential in order to give very young children a good start to their education journey?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend—that is where we will make the biggest difference to children’s life chances. All the evidence is clear that where gaps open up early, they endure into the long run, which has a lasting impact on children’s ability to do well at school and get good GCSEs and on their earnings potential into the future. I pay tribute to my hon. Friend for the work she has done over many years to support her community, including as a school governor.

[Vikki Slade (Mid Dorset and North Poole) (LD)]

While I, too, am excited about the opportunities for some communities, I am really concerned about the growing gap between school-based nurseries and community-based ones—settings in my constituency such as Cuddles, Trailway Tots, and nature nurseries. When those nurseries have written to Ministers to express their concerns, they have often been encouraged to apply for small business rate relief, but given the space standards, that relief simply does not apply. In 2023-24, the average early years setting paid £21,000 in business rates, so those nurseries cannot apply because of the standards required by the education service. In Wales and Scotland, nurseries are exempt from business rates, and schools have them factored into their funding formula. How are we going to make sure that community settings benefit and that we are not just seeing toddlers transferring into school settings, with other settings closing?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am sure that if the hon. Lady writes with further information, the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), will be happy to respond to her questions, but I hope I can give her some reassurance by saying that 27 of the schools that will receive funding will be in a partnership with a private or voluntary early years provider on the school site. Moreover, many of the providers that will deliver the service I have announced will do so around the school day: many schools will ensure that there is provision throughout the year, but also at the start and the end of school days, often delivered in partnership with private or voluntary providers.

[Jenny Riddell-Carpenter (Suffolk Coastal) (Lab)]

Four schools in Suffolk will benefit from today’s announcement, and two of them are in my constituency. I am delighted that Reydon and Waldringfield primary schools will benefit. Does the Minister agree that this new scheme will directly benefit rural constituencies such as mine at a time when access to nursery provision is even more challenging for families, including working families, than it is for their urban neighbours?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am delighted to hear about the impact that this will have on my hon. Friend’s constituency and throughout Suffolk. We believe that in rural communities there is an important role for school-based provision and expanding early years opportunities. Where schools are already at the heart or our communities, what I have announced will allow further provision, creating early years places that will support children and their families, and, crucially, it also represents an important step in supporting child development.

[Sarah Dyke (Glastonbury and Somerton) (LD)]

I welcome the announcement. Curry Mallet Church of England school in my constituency was successful in this funding round, and can expand its early years provision. However, many early years providers, such as Hassockmoor Childcare in Barrington, face significant funding challenges. Given that more than three quarters of entitlement places are provided by private voluntary or independent nurseries, why are those not more central to expansion plans as they continue to experience the nightmare of increased employer NICs, price rises and, sadly, the risk of closure?

[Bridget Phillipson]

They are central to our plans, and they have a critical role to play in support for children and families and delivery of the roll-out, but school-based nurseries also have an important role in supporting children from more disadvantaged communities where they already have a higher proportion of the market share. We think that that can be expanded further to provide high-quality early years provision, which will involve working with private, voluntary and independent providers.

[Matt Rodda (Reading Central) (Lab)]

I pay tribute to the early years workforce, and I strongly support the Secretary of State’s announcement, which builds on other announcements made recently by her and others in her Department. Will she say a little more about the benefits for, in particular, the most disadvantaged children, including those who may have English as a second language?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

We know from all the evidence that children from the most disadvantaged backgrounds have the most to gain from high-quality early years education. Today’s announcement will allow us to provide more places for them, alongside the expansion and the big uplift in the early years pupil premium. When it comes to childcare, we are determined to enable children from more disadvantaged backgrounds to take up places.

[Mr Paul Kohler (Wimbledon) (LD)]

I welcome the announcement and, in particular, the increased funding, but the Government also need to address the problems of funding nursery provision in the private sector. The Castle Kindergarten in my constituency has written to me saying that new restrictions on what nurseries can charge parents to bridge the gap between Government funding and the actual costs of childcare services are putting most private providers in a precarious position. According to a recent article in The Times, nearly 60% of childcare providers plan to limit the number of Government-funded places owing to those restrictions. Will the Secretary of State meet me, along with my constituents, to discuss this issue?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary will be happy to meet the hon. Gentleman to discuss that further. In respect of charging and guidance, I think it an important principle that parents should have transparency on what they are being charged and what they are being charged for, especially when it comes to access to Government-backed provision. As for funding, I have already told the House that we have increased the early years pupil premium by 45%, and alongside that is the £75 million expansion grant. This year, the rate for under-twos has increased by, on average, 3.4%.

[Sally Jameson (Doncaster Central) (Lab/Co-op)]

I welcome the announcement of capital funding, which will benefit Armthorpe’s Shaw Wood academy in my constituency, but what revenue funding nurseries will receive?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The investment in my hon. Friend’s constituency will allow parents to take up the offer of expanded childcare and entitlements, and we will ensure that the places are available to them. Eligible parents will have access to the entitlements that we are expanding and rolling out with the £8 billion of investment that was announced in the Budget.

[Callum Anderson (Buckingham and Bletchley) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, and warmly welcome the inclusion of Great Horwood Church of England school in the first round of funding. Like every school leader in Buckinghamshire, Milton Keynes and the country as a whole, the school’s headteacher, Paula Shaw, is working tirelessly to ensure that all children and their families have the opportunity to thrive. Does the Secretary of State agree that it is vital to ensure that parents in both urban and rural communities never have to choose between their families and their jobs?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend, and I pay tribute to Paula Shaw and the team for all their work to support children and families. We were delighted that so many schools came forward to apply to take part in this first phase. Demand far outstripped supply, so we will be returning to this. However, I am also delighted that Paula and her team felt able to take part and to see the benefits that the extra places will bring to my hon. Friend’s constituents.

[Mr Paul Foster (South Ribble) (Lab)]

This has been a game-changing announcement for my community. Not only has Runshaw college in Leyland been awarded £1.8 million as part of the higher education capital improvement funds, but Northbrook primary academy, also in Leyland, and Longton primary school have been included in the school-based nursery provision. I am delighted about that, and I thank the Ministers. Does the Secretary of State agree that this offers a huge opportunity for the development of young children, as well as putting large sums back in the pockets of working people? We promised and we delivered, and that is why the Conservative Benches are empty.

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is a brilliant champion for the people of South Ribble, and it is a testament to his hard work that he continues to make the case for investment. As well as putting more money back into parents’ pockets through our breakfast clubs and by rolling out primary-based nurseries, we are enabling all our children to have a brilliant start in life. I know that my hon. Friend is as passionate as I am about ensuring that we break the link between background and success, so that where a child is from does not determine what that child can go on to achieve.

[Ian Lavery (Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)]

I am delighted that the fantastic Ringway primary school in Stakeford, in my constituency, will be among the first in the country to host a school-based nursery. That, combined with the much-needed—and long in the planning—rebuilding of the school facilities will have an immeasurable impact on the life chances of young people in my area. Does my right hon. Friend agree that investments of this nature, mainly in socially deprived areas, will be of huge importance, and will she commit herself to rolling out further such schemes on my patch as soon as possible?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend can be assured that the early adopters breakfast clubs programme, for instance, was just the start of a national roll-out. I, too, am delighted that Ringway is part of the first phase of our school-based nurseries programme, and we are determined to ensure that there is more provision throughout the country. Of those that I have announced today, 34% will serve communities that experience disadvantage. It is important for us to ensure that all families can take up childcare and early years provision, and it is critical that we deliver those places. Today’s announcement of £37 million of capital investment, including investment in my hon. Friend’s constituency, will be a crucial part of that.

[Chris Vince (Harlow) (Lab/Co-op)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. I had the opportunity only last week to visit Jerounds primary school in my constituency, and saw the incredible work that it was doing in supporting young people and showing them the value of community pride and the importance of oracy. I have to say that they gave their local MP a very good grilling. I am delighted that Jerounds will be one of the 300 schools to deliver on our pledge of a new school-based surgery. May I ask how this will benefit children and parents in my constituency, and, like others, ask for more provision in Harlow?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I join my hon. Friend in paying tribute to the team at Jerounds for their amazing work in giving our children the best start in life. I am delighted that they were able to take part in the scheme. My announcement and those made by others across Government mean putting more money back into parents’ pockets, but also ensuring that all our children have a brilliant start in life and parents are given extra choices when it comes to the working hours that best fit their family circumstances.

[Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)]

I welcome the Secretary of State’s announcement that seven new school-based nurseries will be established in County Durham, including one at Bloemfontein primary school in my constituency. The headteacher has said that this will transform unused space at the school and help address the current shortage of nursery spaces in our area. Does the Secretary of State agree that parents in Craghead and beyond in North Durham will benefit from cheaper childcare through these new school-based nurseries?

[Bridget Phillipson]

As my hon. Friend sets out, parents right across County Durham will be able to benefit from higher-quality, more affordable childcare that is more available. We are putting money back into parents’ pockets, but we are also providing the places that are required across our country, including in communities that have the most to gain from high-quality early years provision. We know that children from more disadvantaged backgrounds gain the most when they can access early years education, and that is the difference that this Labour Government are making.

[Deirdre Costigan (Ealing Southall) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for today’s announcement, which includes funding for more nursery places at Allenby primary school in Ealing Southall, saving local families an average of £7,500 a year in childcare costs. Does she agree that taken together with yesterday’s increase to the national living wage, which will see £1,400 added to 3 million people’s pay packets, this is clear evidence of Labour delivering on our promise to make work pay?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend, and I join her in sending my best wishes to Allenby, which is taking part in our first phase. She is right to say that this is the difference that a Labour Government are making. We are supporting working families and putting more money back into their pockets, and we delivered a record pay rise yesterday. Alongside that, we have a crucial focus on making sure that, in the early years, our children get all the support that they deserve to break the link between background and success.

[Terry Jermy (South West Norfolk) (Lab)]

Swaffham is a small market town in my rural constituency. It has seen significant house building over the last few years, so every time I go there people are keen to talk about the impact of childcare and the lack of spaces, which is why I am so pleased that Swaffham Church of England primary academy is being funded as part of this scheme. May I warmly invite the Secretary of State to Swaffham to see the positive impact that this policy is having on rural communities such as mine?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend raises an important point: where we see housing development and changes taking place, we must ensure that we have high-quality childcare and early years provision running alongside that. Through the bidding that schools were able to take part in, we considered questions about local need, and I am delighted that Swaffham will be taking part. Either I or my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary will be happy to visit the area to see the provision, perhaps when it is up and running.

[Jodie Gosling (Nuneaton) (Lab)]

I could not be more pleased to welcome today’s news. As a former nursery manager, I understand the need to ensure that all children have the very best start. I remember the sense of abandonment when Sure Start, health visitors and school nurses were retracted from our community provision. Like many others, I had to face salary cuts and salary sacrifices to keep our nursery doors open over the last eight years under the previous Government. On Friday, I visited Stockingford academy, one of the schools benefiting from the today’s announcement, and heard from its dedicated team about the challenges they face. This year, only 7% of the 75 children are on track. Does the Secretary of State agree that the new provision will transform high-deprivation places, where 46% of the population already have high levels of debt?

[Bridget Phillipson]

That takes me back to June last year, when my hon. Friend, who was at that point Labour’s parliamentary candidate, and I launched Labour’s plan to deliver more school-based nurseries. Today, coming out of that plan, we have announced the action that parents in this country voted for.

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Sean Woodcock (Banbury) (Lab)]

In response to my hon. Friend the Member for Bootle (Peter Dowd), I actually think there are fewer Conservative Members present than there are pages in the book “The Very Hungry Caterpillar”, which says everything about where they are coming from.

I am really grateful to the Secretary of State for her statement and for the fact that the town of Chipping Norton in my constituency will get one of the first 300 school-based nurseries announced today. Does she find it hard, as I do, to take lectures from the Conservative party when it comes to the provision of childcare?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Yes. It is this Labour Government who are getting on and delivering the childcare places that parents across our country want to see, including in my hon. Friend’s constituency of Banbury. I know how hard he works for his constituents to make sure that their voices are heard in this place. He is a real champion for local families, and I want to make sure that, by working together with him and colleagues from right across the House, we deliver better life chances for all our children.

[Tristan Osborne (Chatham and Aylesford) (Lab)]

According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies’ small business report, early years education is vital for children’s development, so I welcome today’s announcement that school-based nurseries will be created at Horsted infant school and two other schools in Medway, and at five others in Kent. Does the Minister agree that this investment, coupled with that given by Labour councils across the country through school streets programmes, will create a true learning environment that is fit for purpose?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I join my hon. Friend in welcoming the important contribution that Horsted, in his constituency, will make as part of this scheme. I agree that we have to do a lot more as a country to make sure that all our children get a brilliant range of experiences, including in their early years, with the highest-quality provision. Today’s announcement takes us a step further towards that reality.

[James Asser (West Ham and Beckton) (Lab)]

The Secretary of State said in her announcement that many of these school-based nurseries will be in places with the greatest need. That is certainly the case in my constituency, and I am very grateful that Portway primary in West Ham has been included. I have said in this House before that my constituents do not lack ambition; they lack opportunity, and education is the golden ticket to that opportunity. Does the Secretary of State agree that nurseries provide opportunities not only for children but for adults, and can she assure us that, as the programme is rolled out, the focus will remain on areas that have not only educational needs but economic needs and other forms of deprivation?

[Bridget Phillipson]

As my hon. Friend says, the expanded provision at Portway in his constituency will make a big difference by supporting parents to take on work opportunities, to have more money in their pockets, and to take on the hours that suit them. Critically, it will allow us to provide more support for children, including those from disadvantaged backgrounds, right across his constituency.

[Perran Moon (Camborne and Redruth) (Lab)]

Trelai primary school sits at the heart of my Camborne, Redruth and Hayle constituency. It is surrounded by an area that suffers from profound levels of poverty and deprivation. If ever there was an area that needed some good news on early years, it is mine, following the shameful neglect by the previous Government. Does the Minister agree that new childcare places in new and expanded nurseries, including at Trelai primary school, will help children from the most deprived backgrounds have the best start in life, after the life chances of children from deprived backgrounds were ignored by the Conservative party for years?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend raises an important point about the impact that this policy will have. On average, 40% of the overall gap between disadvantaged 16-year-olds and their peers has already emerged by the age of five. That is why it is critical that we invest in the early years to give more children the best possible start in life, and today’s announcement will create much needed high-quality early years provision and places, including in his constituency.

[Sam Carling (North West Cambridgeshire) (Lab)]

I enormously welcome the Government’s decision to introduce 300 new Government-funded school-based nurseries. I am particularly delighted that one of them will be in the Hampton Vale primary academy in my constituency. Does the Secretary of State agree that these new nurseries will make a real difference to families in my constituency and across the country by saving them up to £7,500?

[Bridget Phillipson]

Yes. Today’s announcement will support parents to save up to £7,500 a year, putting more money back into their pockets. Taken together with our commitment to roll out 750 free breakfast clubs from later on this month, it is clear that this Labour Government are on the side of working parents.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

The announcement of a new school-based nursery at the Heath Hayes primary academy in my Cannock Chase constituency is very welcome, and shows that this Labour Government are keeping their promises and delivering for parents and children. As capacity is very stretched at Heath Hayes, this capital investment is very welcome. I am the parent of a child who benefited hugely from a school nursery. Does my right hon. Friend agree that school-based nurseries set children up perfectly for going into reception?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I agree with my hon. Friend. I have seen for myself the impact that this policy has, particularly for parents who already have older children at school. It eases the transition from nursery to reception and sets up children to succeed. Importantly, it allows staff to build relationships with parents and families, and to identify whether problems are developing in areas such as SEND, where the earlier we spot problems, the earlier we can intervene and put in place the support that is required.

[Dave Robertson (Lichfield) (Lab)]

I thank the Secretary of State for her statement, because this is an investment in early years, which is an investment in the future of our communities. In my constituency, there is an investment of hundreds of thousands of pounds at Springhill primary academy in Burntwood, Boney Hay primary academy in Burntwood and St Stephen’s primary in Fradley. These schools do amazing work in supporting the next generation, and this money will be used to renovate facilities, give children a better environment in which to start their learning, expand the number of places and help provide the 30 hours of free childcare that working parents so desperately need. Can I put on record my thanks to these schools, and can I ask if the Secretary of State will join me in visiting schools and celebrating the work they do?

[Madam Deputy Speaker (Ms Nusrat Ghani)]

Just say yes, Secretary of State. [Laughter.]

[Bridget Phillipson]

I will do my very best to visit Lichfield to see the fantastic provision and, critically, to see the brilliant work my hon. Friend is doing to champion local schools and nurseries in his constituency.

[Markus Campbell-Savours (Penrith and Solway) (Lab)]

We on these Benches recognise that school-based childcare offers some of the best childcare. I welcome the statement from the Secretary of State, which means that the Government will be supporting the expansion of the rural nursery at Paddle school near Cockermouth. Could the Secretary of State share with the House how these plans will help parents get into work?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend knows better than most the importance of high-quality provision, including in rural communities, allowing parents to avoid having to travel considerable distances. This announcement will make a big difference in his constituency and in constituencies across the country. From the applications to the scheme, we saw real demand. More than 640 schools applied to take part, so there is a big demand, which we want to take forward in future phases, including in rural communities.

[Josh Simons (Makerfield) (Lab)]

After a night of little sleep, I am feeling something that many have said in this Chamber before: being a parent in this country is too exhausting and too expensive. That is why on Friday I am hosting a coffee morning targeted at dads, with former Wigan Warriors players and Andy’s Man Club. It is also why I am so delighted that, down the road, Hindley Green community primary and Hindley St Peter’s will benefit from this Government’s investments in new nurseries. This Labour Government are investing in the working families I represent. Can I thank the Secretary of State for that, and ask her about the timeline for rolling out the scheme to further schools that I represent in my constituency?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for the work that he is doing to support local families and also dads. Becoming a parent for the first time can be a daunting experience for mothers, but it can also be daunting for fathers, and they need support as well, so I pay tribute to him.

This is the first phase of our announcement. We will draw on the experience of the schools that take part in the first phase as we take forward future phases. The majority of the 6,000 new places created will be available from September 2025. That is the difference that a Labour Government are making.

[Dan Aldridge (Weston-super-Mare) (Lab)]

I am so excited to hear about the nursery at St Anne’s church academy in Weston-super-Mare, especially from the Dispatch Box today. People such as Julie McCallum at Play and Learn pre-school in Worle have shouldered the burdens of the previous Government’s evisceration of early years and of their lack of strategy. Will the Secretary of State join me in thanking so many early years practitioners across my constituency and the UK for their tireless work to give our children the best start possible?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I congratulate the amazing early years workforce and our education workforce in Weston-super-Mare and across our country. They are the people who make the biggest difference for children in such settings. Important as capital is to creating the places, it is the people who deliver for our children and support them in their earliest years who make the biggest difference, and for that they deserve our praise.

[David Williams (Stoke-on-Trent North) (Lab)]

We started out with six Conservative Members, which we can divide by two to get the number now left on their Benches. Given their track record in this field, perhaps the rest have been put in detention for the rest of the day.

I am so proud to see that Smallthorne primary academy in my constituency of Stoke-on-Trent North and Kidsgrove has been selected for a new school-based nursery. Does the Secretary of State agree with me that these nurseries are vital in places such as Smallthorne, not only for the childcare they provide, but for helping with school-readiness, closing the developmental gap early on and giving every single child the best start in life?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right about the difference that early years provision makes, not just in those crucial early years but right throughout children’s lives. The evidence could not be clearer. I am delighted that, in Smallthorne and in many communities across our country, more children will have the opportunity to benefit from high-quality early years provision, which is critical to their life chances and also really important for parents in his constituency.

[Noah Law (St Austell and Newquay) (Lab)]

I am sure that the children of Pondhu primary school and their families are delighted to welcome the investment in the nursery announced by the Secretary of State, not least because St Austell Central has sadly become the second most deprived ward in the whole of Cornwall. What impact does the Secretary of State expect the investment to have on the life chances of children living in deprived families?

[Bridget Phillipson]

We know that children from more disadvantaged backgrounds will have the most benefit from high-quality early years education, and they benefit the most when that starts earlier. So much of the overall gap will have opened up by that age; 40% of the overall gap between disadvantaged 16-year-olds and their peers has already emerged by the age of five. That is why it is essential that we do more to support children and families when children are younger. That is right for those children and their families, and it is also an investment in our country’s future.

[Andrew Pakes (Peterborough) (Lab)]

Looking at the Conservative Benches, I am sure that those on the Conservative Front Bench are glad that this statement is about nurseries, rather than school attendance—or truancy.

I thank the Secretary of State for joining me in Peterborough earlier this week to meet the fantastic pupils, parents and staff at Fulbridge academy, which excels in giving great education to students in my constituency. Will she join me in congratulating and paying tribute to Ben Erskine and the brilliant staff team at the school? Does she agree that with leadership, a relentless focus on standards and the resources in today’s announcement, absolutely nothing can hold back the ambition of working-class communities like mine?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I was delighted to join my hon. Friend in visiting Fulbridge and to meet the brilliant staff team, who are doing so much to support all children in that community, so that they can achieve all they are capable of. There should be no ceiling on children’s ambition and aspiration, including in working-class communities. I know he will continue to champion his constituency and community, and ensure that, alongside our plan for change, we deliver a country in which background is no barrier to getting on in life, and in which we have broken the link between background and success.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

I warmly welcome the news that Uplands primary school in Sandhurst has been awarded funding to expand its school-based nursery. Will the Secretary of State set out what this means for Labour’s commitment to delivering top-quality childcare for families across my constituency and the country?

[Bridget Phillipson]

This Labour Government want to make sure that families can access childcare support. That is important for families’ work choices and, critically, for children’s development. That is why we have set ourselves an ambitious target of ensuring that a record number of children are school-ready when they start school, and high-quality early years provision, including in my hon. Friend’s constituency, is a critical part of that. Alongside that, this announcement will put more money back into parents’ pockets.

[Michael Wheeler (Worsley and Eccles) (Lab)]

I feel as though I should declare an interest, as I am the proud dad of a little boy who is literally taking his first steps as our Government take these important steps in a critical area.

I welcome the statement and all the Secretary of State’s work in this area. I particularly welcome the fact that St Stephen’s in my constituency of Worsley and Eccles will be home to one of these nurseries. As the Secretary of State well knows, I have long been a champion of available, affordable and accessible childcare, especially for working parents. Does she agree that delivering on these aims is a real sign that our Government are delivering for children and their parents?

[Bridget Phillipson]

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. For many years, when our party was in opposition, I campaigned alongside him to make sure that working parents get the support that they need to get on at work, have good working standards and conditions and, critically, can access high-quality early years provision and childcare. This announcement of about £37 million of extra capital investment, including at St Stephen’s in his constituency, will make a big difference to working parents in his constituency and across our country, but it is also an important part of this Government’s plan for change, which breaks the link between background and success.

Education

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Wednesday 26th March 2025 Written Corrections

The following extract is from Second Reading of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education (Transfer of Functions etc) Bill [Lords] on 25 February 2025.

[Bridget Phillipson]

… This Bill will bring together the many disparate parts of a very fragmented system, which employers, particularly smaller employers, often find hard to navigate the right way through, and are not always clear about the best training and qualification routes in order to find the people that they need. Also, the changes we have made to English and maths in particular will support employers to create 10,000 additional apprenticeships every single year.

[Official Report, 25 February 2025; Vol. 762, c. 680.]

Written correction submitted by the Secretary of State for Education, the right hon. Member for Houghton and Sunderland South (Bridget Phillipson):

[Bridget Phillipson]

… This Bill will bring together the many disparate parts of a very fragmented system, which employers, particularly smaller employers, often find hard to navigate the right way through, and are not always clear about the best training and qualification routes in order to find the people that they need. Also, the changes we have made to English and maths in particular will support employers to unlock 10,000 additional apprenticeship completions every single year.

Higher Education: Protecting Public Money

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Tuesday 25th March 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

Today I am setting out the actions this Government are taking to tackle concerning evidence of abuse of public money associated with the franchised higher education system which we inherited.

Franchising, where one higher education provider subcontracts provision to a delivery partner, grew significantly under the previous Government, but most franchised providers were not placed under the direct oversight of the regulator—the Office for Students. When done well, franchised higher education can be an important driver of inclusion, but against a backdrop of growing financial instability within higher education, for some institutions, it is apparent that franchising became less about expanding access and more about maximising income.

In 2023 and 2024, the Government Internal Audit Agency, the National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee all raised concerns about abuse, unethical behaviour and fraud. Without the necessary guardrails, or a funding settlement that put universities on a sound financial footing, in some institutions the system has become a breeding ground for abuse, unethical behaviour and fraud.

Earlier this month, I was made aware that there is a disproportionately large number of Romanian students settled in the UK who receive student funding from the Student Loans Company.

Investigative work undertaken by the Student Loans Company suggests organised exploitation both of Romanian students and of the UK taxpayer.

Under this Government, this abuse will end. The Department for Education and the Office for Students already have a programme of investigations under way related to franchised provision. Where these investigations have found abuse of the student finance system there will be serious consequences. I have now also asked the Public Sector Fraud Authority to tackle this threat and take forward this work across Government.

We will also take immediate action on the use of agents to recruit students. The Government can see no legitimate role for domestic agents in the recruitment of UK students. We are taking urgent steps to prevent any further abuse of the system.

Since taking office in July, the Government have moved at pace to tackle the many inherited challenges in the higher education sector, which this Government believe should be treated as a public good, not a political battleground. In November, I set out changes to the level of tuition fees and maintenance, for the first time in seven years, and set out the five principles for broader reform of the sector which underpin the approach this Government will take. We have already reformed the Office for Students, accepting the report of Sir David Behan and bringing new leadership and a tighter focus.

I have written to Edward Peck, the incoming chair, to ask him to make protection of public money a top priority. To support this, I will bring forward legislation at the next available opportunity to give the Office for Students stronger powers to act more quickly and effectively to protect public money.

In January the Department launched a consultation on franchised higher education. The proposals would bring much closer regulatory scrutiny of the largest franchised providers—the ones in which there has been significant growth in recent years—bringing them under direct oversight by the Office for Students. The Office for Students is also consulting to strengthen its conditions of registration, to stop providers with weak governance arrangements from being able to register in the first place. We have asked it also to urgently strengthen the requirements on the providers who subcontract provision. Together, if implemented, these proposals would impose new and significant controls on franchising.

Higher education providers are engines of growth and drivers of opportunity, but these issues threaten the integrity of the sector. With the regulator, we will set the rules, we will enforce them and we will protect public money. However, ultimately universities must take ownership of these issues for themselves and we will look to them to take responsibility to ensure abuse like this is brought to an end. There can be no excuse for the abuse of public money, and under this Government there will be no hiding place for those who perpetrate such abuse.

[HCWS547]

School Funding: National Insurance Contributions Grant and Pupil Premium

Bridget Phillipson Excerpts

Tuesday 18th March 2025 Written Statements

[The Secretary of State for Education (Bridget Phillipson)]

Today the Department for Education has confirmed national insurance contributions grant funding rates and schools’ pupil premium funding rates for the financial year 2025-26.

The NICs grant will provide schools, colleges, and high-needs settings with over £1 billion to support them with the increases to employer national insurance contributions from April 2025, broken down as set out in the table below.