Children’s Social Care
Josh MacAlister Excerpts(1 day, 18 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Dr Huq. I thank all Members for their contributions to this important debate. Particular thanks go to my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes). I acknowledge the Select Committee’s inquiry and important work, on which I will say more in a moment.
The report highlights a system under pressure, with rising demand, rising costs and inconsistent experiences, which requires urgent reform. Too many children are experiencing childhood without the essential components of connection and love, which should be the central obsession of the care system, but too often are not. As chair of the independent review of children’s social care in 2022, I called for a radical reset. Today, as Minister for Children and Families, I am determined to deliver it.
I will respond to Members’ contributions before I respond to aspects of the Committee’s report. I join my hon. Friend the Member for Falkirk (Euan Stainbank) in congratulating the young people and organisations that have championed additional rights for care-experienced young people. I encourage people to get behind the Labour candidate in the Scottish parliamentary elections, who has so successfully championed those causes. I also acknowledge Terry Galloway’s work across the UK to champion and secure additional rights for care-experienced young people. I will continue to engage with Terry. I do not really have a choice, as Terry makes sure I engage with him—as does Chris Wild. I will follow with keen interest the development of local authorities adopting care experience as a protected characteristic.
My hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen (Darren Paffey) has direct experience of the care system. Indeed, one of the strengths of this Parliament is that we have so many parliamentarians who have a foot in some aspect of the care system as well as in the nation’s Parliament.
Ahead of National Care Leavers Month in November, we are focused on ensuring that the Government celebrate role models for care-experienced young people. My hon. Friend is one of those role models. I am sure many care-experienced young people will look at what he does here in the UK Parliament and consider what they can go on to achieve themselves.
I was struck by the clarity of Atlas, Mac, George and Ethan when I met them earlier this week. I thank my hon. Friend for bringing them into my office. They cut through a lot of the noise I hear as a Minister. Having had hundreds of conversations with care-experienced people over the years, I was again reminded of just what it is that we need to get on and deliver.
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase (Josh Newbury) for sharing his own experience, and I strongly associate myself with his remarks, particularly on the need for changes in the fostering and adoption system. I will come back to that later.
I welcome the cross-party nature of this debate. I thank the Liberal Democrat spokesperson, the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset (Anna Sabine), and I will return to aspects of adoption support and the ASGSF, as she raised some important points. I also thank the Conservative spokesperson, the hon. Member for West Suffolk (Nick Timothy), for the spirit in which he approaches this issue. I recognise the importance of the connection between the overall children’s social care system and how essential it is that we strengthen the country’s child protection arrangements. A major part of that is tackling harms outside of the home, child abuse, child sexual abuse, group-based violence and the rape gangs he mentioned.
We need to recognise much more than we have in our debates in this Parliament that some of the underlying vulnerabilities of young girls stem from failings in our care system. I see far too many instances of young people who, when something has gone wrong, are sent to live in an institutional setting far away from people who know them and what their face looks like. Because of the vulnerable position that the care system puts them in, they are far too often left prey to violent and appalling criminals. We need to root that out at source.
The Government’s overall response is the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which is landmark legislation that we tabled within weeks of coming into government. There will be £2 billion of investment over this spending review period, with hundreds of millions being put into the Families First Partnership programme, which is all about building a multidisciplinary family help system.
We are now shifting gear—and this responds directly to a point made by the Chair of the Select Committee—away from pathfinders and tests to whole-system programmes of change that take in the entire country. I am grateful to the Committee for its work, carefully considered recommendations and the in-depth evidence it took, particularly from those with direct experience.
I will move briefly through the areas covered by the Committee’s recommendations. First, regarding the need for early intervention and intensive support, I reassure hon. Members that, at their centre, our reforms are about creating multidisciplinary family help teams in every corner of England. These will be staffed not simply by social workers working in a high-assessment, high-referral, paper-based, bureaucratic administration, which is the description that many social workers have of the current orthodoxy. This is about moving towards multidisciplinary, locally based, low-stigma and well-evidenced support for families when they need it, with a focus not only on child protection but on the vast majority of families who are not posing significant harm to their children but simply need support and help.
To reassure Members, I should say that that is not being taken forward solely by the Department for Education, but is a cross-Government endeavour. In a couple of weeks, I will be taking other Ministers and senior officials from the Home Office and the Department of Health and Social Care to see one of the most successful examples of multidisciplinary family help teams and multi-agency child protection teams. I am meeting ministerial colleagues at the Ministry for Communities, Housing and Local Government next week to have explicit conversations about how we grip the money we are putting into family help reforms, so that we can get effective change through the system. This is not simply about handing money out to local authorities and expecting change to happen; it is about managing a nationwide programme of reform, with investment alongside it, and holding each other to account to deliver the change that families urgently need.
Secondly, on foster care, I made the point—not as a Member of Parliament, but as someone who chaired the review, giving evidence to Select Committees in this place—that, within a year, we were able as a country to do a remarkable thing in creating 100,000 homes for Ukrainian families from a standing start. If we could do that, why was it not possible for us to do better than approving only 1,800 foster carers last year? That number is not even large enough to replace those who are retiring and leaving the vocation of fostering.
I reassure members of the Committee and Members of this House that we will invest tens of millions of pounds very soon in major changes to the fostering system. Regional care co-operatives and fostering hubs will sit at the heart of those changes. I will come forward soon with a comprehensive set of measures to ensure that we boost the numbers of foster carers and the types of foster care that children need. It is a personal priority for me as the Children and Families Minister.
On multi-agency child protection, the Government are taking forward bold structural changes to create multi-agency child protection teams in every local authority across the country, by fusing together different professionals from across the safeguarding partnerships so that, within one team, they can share the information they need and take joint expert action. The Government will put in place more guidance and extra support for the practitioners in those teams, because identifying significant harm, doing that with accuracy, taking action with pace once harm has been identified, and then holding other agencies to account for results is often what is missing in serious incidents where things go wrong.
Included in that will be a sharp focus on harms outside the home—I make that point because the Chair of the Select Committee emphasised it. During the review, I saw too many times that agencies were coming together in lots of meetings and describing the same concerns, but were not taking action. Parents themselves were sometimes the ones crying out for help when their children were at risk outside the home. Our child protection framework has to work in keeping children safe from harms where those harms are not based on the family network. I will also be setting out details of a consultation on the child protection authority very soon, which will support some of these efforts.
Helen Hayes
On the work on extra-familial harms, what engagement is the Minister having with colleagues in the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government? That very much reflects my perspective as a constituency MP and the heartbreaking cases I have seen in my constituency, where a family needed to move due to an extra-familial harm to a child. The social housing system is unable at the moment to protect the family’s tenancy rights. What happens is that families then move into temporary accommodation, and the whole stability of their life unravels as a consequence. In the previous Parliament, I put forward a proposal under the name Georgia’s law, which was named for one of my constituents who experienced exactly that, with utterly tragic consequences for her family. I wonder whether the Minister might pick that up with colleagues cross-departmentally.
Josh MacAlister
I thank my hon. Friend for raising what sounds like the very important idea for Georgia’s law. I would be really delighted to hear more from her about that. If there are aspects that I can take forward with Ministers in other Departments, I will do so.
Regarding information sharing, we are making big changes to set the expectations in different systems, so that they can confidently share information. We have a single unique identifier that enables that to happen. Those pilots are under way at the moment, and the Bill will allow for that.
We want to see support for care leavers that is consistent and strong. The Bill includes national Staying Close support, and we will set out soon more details about what that support should include and the expectations across the country for it. It will help care leavers to live independently, but I stress that one of the changes that I would like us to see as a Government is a shift away from always talking about getting care leavers to the point of independence, because what they actually need from the care system is not independence, but inter- dependence, connection, a sense of belonging and love. That should be the driving purpose of both care and the leaving care system. Many of the things we are trying to provide through a state function are much more naturally provided through organic family networks.
Specifically on the question about the Government’s recent announcement of support for higher education, which was raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase, we will guarantee the maximum maintenance support for care leavers going to university, without a means test. That change, announced by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education at the Dispatch Box last week, has been widely welcomed.
Ofsted inspections will, and have already started to, provide a dedicated grade looking at the experience of care leavers, which means that there will be a focus on that.
On the question of the adoption and special guardianship support fund, which was raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Cannock Chase and the Front-Bench spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats, the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset, I am attracted to my hon. Friend’s idea about wider support. There are options for wider support. I met adopters and adoption support staff myself in recent weeks, and especially during National Adoption Week, and there are a number of options. I want to bring forward a longer-term plan for the ASGSF, to provide confidence and certainty, and I want to continue speaking to Members of this House, but also to members of the adoption community and to special guardians, who are part of that community. We will come back with more detail on that issue, but I recognise the importance of what it provides.
Anna Sabine
Is there any chance that when the Minister is looking at the point about children with foetal alcohol spectrum disorder, he could look at the fact that certain groups of children, with certain conditions, may require much higher levels of financial support than others to get the diagnoses they need?
Josh MacAlister
I certainly will. The recognition is there that we need to provide a children’s social care system that is able to intuitively wrap itself around all sorts of shapes and sizes of families, who may have very different needs. Too often, the system is not able to do that, and when it fails to, problems often escalate, costs go up and the state ends up picking up the bill anyway, but it is much greater, provision is much less effective and the outcomes are worse. So I do recognise the description that the hon. Member for Frome and East Somerset has given of that.
On kinship care, we will be bringing forward a pilot for kinship allowances soon. It will benefit up to 5,000 children, and I can confirm that, as part of the pilot, payments will be equivalent to foster rates. I am looking at whether we can widen out some of the support that comes with that as well, and information on that will be shared soon, with a launch. Carers with special guardianship or child arrangements orders will receive payments equivalent to foster rates. I want to be clear about that. There will be an independent evaluation that goes alongside this, to inform the roll-out, and that should give us very strong data and hopefully a strong case in the course of this spending review period.
In terms of regulation and profit, I am concerned about the level of profiteering in the children’s social care system about the level of profiteering in the children’s social care system and the rising reliance on private providers, particularly of residential children’s homes. The Bill will strengthen Ofsted’s powers, improve oversight and make more data publicly available. I strongly believe that regional care co-operatives can be a powerful vehicle for getting back control of the broken care market. The Government will use the profit cap if necessary; that is why we have taken those powers in the Bill.
I understand the case made for a fresh, universal set of care standards that are more intuitive and that allow us to regulate and set packages of care around children, regardless of where they live, while they are in the care of the state. The Government’s focus at the moment has been on the Bill, but I will continue to look at opportunities to improve care standards. In the meantime, I want to make sure that the options for 16 and 17-year-olds meet their needs. During the review, I met young people who felt abandoned at 16 and 17 because of the type of accommodation they were in. But I have also met 16 and 17-year-olds who do not want the same type of children’s home care they may expect to get at the age of 11 or 12. We must design care standards that work for the whole population.
In terms of the children’s social care workforce, we are introducing changes to support those in the residential care system. Specifically on social workers, the Government have a sharp focus on improving post-qualifying support, so that we can build expertise through training, both to support the roll-out of multidisciplinary family help teams and to strengthen the expertise we need in multi-agency child protection.
Regarding disabled children, we will consider the Law Commission’s 40 recommendations, which have recently been published, and provide a full response. Regarding advocacy, changes will be made, but I am keen to look at what more can be done even once those have been shared. Advocacy can be an important and protective factor for many children who are in institutions where they do not feel as though their voices are heard.
To respond to the Chair of the Select Committee regarding family group decision making, the reason not to push for a specific model of family group decision making in primary legislation is that there is always the possibility in the next few years—I would love it if this did happen—that more impact evaluations come out that show a slightly different model of FGDM, which local authorities should have the choice to use.
As a Government, we are trying to build an infrastructure that sets the national framework with the outcomes that we want children’s social care to achieve; practice guides that lay out the best available evidence, and I hope to have practice guidance for FGDMs as part of the roll-out; and then an expectation, through inspection and accountability, that service designers and practitioners are following the best available evidence in order to achieve the outcomes set out by the Government. I hope that reassures the Chair of the Select Committee.
In closing, I give deep thanks to the Committee for its interest in this issue. Children’s social care is an area of Government policy that is often overlooked. On the eve of Care Leavers Month—this is the first time we are celebrating it as a month, with an Adjournment debate I am looking forward to taking part in—I thank everyone for their contributions, and I welcome their interest and challenge on this important set of changes. I reassure Members—as my hon. Friend the Member for Southampton Itchen asked me to—that this issue is my top priority, and I encourage them to get behind it, as part of a cross-party endeavour that can truly transform children’s lives.
Education
Josh MacAlister Excerpts(1 day, 18 hours ago)
Written CorrectionsRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Josh MacAlister
The Government made big decisions at the spending review to increase the overall funding available to 16-to-19 courses. Next financial year, there will be an increase of over £800 million.
[Official Report, 20 October 2025; Vol. 773, c. 601.]
Written correction submitted by the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister):
Josh MacAlister
The Government made big decisions at the spending review to increase the overall funding available to 16-to-19 courses. Next financial year, there will be an increase of nearly £800 million.
International Baccalaureate: Funding in State Schools
Josh MacAlister Excerpts(2 days, 18 hours ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Roger. I thank the hon. Member for Didcot and Wantage (Olly Glover) for securing this debate and all the Members who have contributed to it. The international baccalaureate can be a fantastic qualification for young people. I commend all the staff and students in international baccalaureate teaching settings. The debate has highlighted the incredible contribution that those teachers and those settings can make to opportunities for young people—we have heard an awful lot about that today.
I want to stress a few things in responding to the points made in the debate, first regarding the role that A-levels play in our school and education system. The hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti) referred to a school “regretfully” moving to A-levels, as if they are lesser qualifications. A-levels are fantastic qualifications. They are stretching for students. They offer variety, choice and combinations of qualifications that leave doors open for young people at 16 and beyond. They are recognised by the top universities in the world, including those here in the UK. I urge Members to be careful not to suggest that A-levels are somehow secondary or second order to the international baccalaureate, while recognising the contribution that the international baccalaureate can make.
Alison Bennett
A-levels are undoubtedly brilliant, but does the Minister agree that they are more narrow than the international baccalaureate?
Josh MacAlister
No, I do not agree with that. Combinations of A-levels allow young people to have a wide and rich curriculum. In fact, the large programme uplift changes that we are making prioritise choices of A-levels that extend beyond the standard three, up to five, to include advanced maths and other well regarded A-level subjects. I do not recognise what the hon. Lady suggests.
Steve Darling
My two sons both went to Torquay boys’ grammar school. One undertook the international baccalaureate. The other went down the A-level route and got three A*s. Universities do not like students taking more than three A-levels. We often joke with him that perhaps he should have stretched himself and undertaken the international baccalaureate. What would the Minister’s advice be?
Josh MacAlister
I think the logic of that point is that universities will accept three A-levels, and they will accept more than three A-levels, and they will accept an international baccalaureate. The point here is not that the international baccalaureate is the gateway to universities; it is an addition to the system and allows extra stretch for students. I will make a bit more progress and then am happy to take further interventions.
The other point to make at this stage is that it is not correct to say that funding has been scrapped for the international baccalaureate. In fact, some of the statements put out by settings that offer the international baccalaureate have been clear to say that the funding has not been scrapped. The large programme uplift application has been changed, and that additional 20% will no longer be available for settings that want to offer the international baccalaureate.
I want to spend a few minutes setting this decision in context. We are focused as a Government on raising standards across the 16-to-19 education system. We want to offer opportunity for all young people, and we want stretching and rigorous qualifications for them. The large programme uplift will focus on those taking four or more A-levels that include advanced maths and offer a broad and challenging curriculum.
What do we know about the international baccalaureate and how the uplift funding is being used? Only 0.2% of students in 16-to-19 settings are studying the international baccalaureate, and the large programme uplift is only 0.1% of the entire 16-to-19 funding made available. Many of the institutions offering the international baccalaureate are themselves selective in their pre-16 intake. Far fewer students are drawn from disadvantaged backgrounds; I have a list of the rates of free school meals in the main institutions offering it, and they are very low. I am aware of only one LPU-backed setting that offers the international baccalaureate in the entirety of the north and the midlands combined.
This is the challenge I put back to those who have contributed to the debate: if their argument is that they want the international baccalaureate to be offered in many more settings across the country, and for it to be a genuinely equal opportunity that lifts up many students, where do they propose finding the money to do that? The Government are putting additional money into the 16-to-19 system, which I will come on to in a moment, but Members are defending a system that applies to only a very small minority, and that is not equally spread. It is a fantastic opportunity for students, but this Government’s focus, as it will always be, is on opportunity for all.
Ms Billington
I gently remind the Minister that, simply because people live in the south-east, it does not mean they are dripping in gold. My constituency in particular experiences distinct levels of deprivation; only 10% of our children manage to pass the Kent test in East Thanet. The opportunity to access the international baccalaureate is vital for those deprived communities. We all know that there are extreme levels of deprivation in this country both across geographical areas and in pockets. I remind the Minister that, in these circumstances, we need to ensure that we have an education policy that reaches the most deprived in places like mine, as much as in places like his.
Josh MacAlister
I agree that we need to ensure that opportunity goes to those who are furthest from it. My point is that this system does not provide an equal opportunity for many young people in how it is allocated at the moment. Even in institutions in the south where there are large numbers of young people frozen out of opportunities, the ones offering the international baccalaureate are overwhelmingly not offering it to those young people from disadvantaged backgrounds. That is an important point to make in this debate.
Before I move on to overall funding, my final point is that we gave notice of this decision in October, which is ahead of other notifications about the 16-to-19 funding system. We have put in place transitional arrangements for those students who are currently midway through the international baccalaureate.
What is the reality of the funding that the Government are giving to sixth form and FE colleges? The Government have made the decision to increase overall spending on the 16-to-19 system, from £7.6 billion last year to £8.6 billion this year. That reflects a significant increase in not only the number of students but the funding rates, including the base rate of funding per student across 16-to-19 settings, going up by 5.4% to over £5,000. The extra funding for low prior attainment and for children in care is going up by 6.8% this year, and an extra level of funding for resit English and maths is going up by 11.5% this year.
That represents a significant increase in the 16-to-19 funding settlement for the whole system. Within it, colleges and sixth form settings have the freedom of choice to prioritise across their programmes what they teach, including the international baccalaureate. The LPU adds an additional 20% on top of that. I have already highlighted that the LPU is tiny as a percentage of the overall funding for 16 to 19. As a Government we want to make sure that goes into opportunities for the broadest number of students.
Finally, some broad points reflecting on this debate about opportunity and the Government’s priorities. I appreciate the points that hon. Members have made about the choices made by the Government and that many hon. Members wish us to keep the large programme uplift focused as it now is. However, when we add all of the things that hon. Members want to prioritise across the education system, while they may not seem like huge amounts of money individually, taken together they always lead to choices about priorities. The Government are absolutely focused on raising standards, in part because the soft bigotry of low expectations that we have inherited from the 14 years of the previous Government.
I want to say a few things about that. Our work on early years and the huge investment in childcare and breakfast clubs—so that young people can start their education on an even basis—is built off the fact that the coalition Government demolished 3,500 Sure Start centres. The long tail of that for young people’s attainment, especially those from deprived backgrounds, is felt to this day.
Saqib Bhatti
I have to challenge that point. I said that the Minister was a fair man—if I did not, I will say it now—but, if he is being fair, will he acknowledge that the Conservatives started the investment in childcare programme that the Government have continued?
Josh MacAlister
What the Conservative Government did not do was ensure that there was a fiscal position left to fund those sorts of commitments. I will give the hon. Gentleman and the previous Government credit for building on some of the excellent work that had been started under the last Labour Government around phonics, a focus on improving maths and some of the curriculum changes. I give credit where it is due on those.
We now see year 8 students falling behind in their reading—and the Government will be saying more about that in the curriculum and assessment review. That is why we will be introducing reading checks with a focus on standards. Those will mean every young person—regardless of the cash their parents have in their pockets—does well and that on finishing secondary school has equal opportunities and choice to take their talents as far as they can in 16 to 19.
Finally, we will have record levels of investment in the 16-to-19 system. That will include a focus on the scandal of the constant cycle of young people not reaching the level of English and maths needed by the time that they finish secondary school, and being washed around again and again in a resit system that is not fit for purpose. We are rebuilding and investing in that system to ensure that we get that second, third or fourth chance for every young person so that they can get into work and benefit from the opportunities that come from it.
The soft bigotry of low expectations is growing educational inequality. That is what we inherited. It is a million young people not in education, employment or training and the moral scandal that that represents. It is underfunding our 16-to-19 education system year after year so that far too few young people get the quality of teaching needed and there is not support for staff to ensure that young people have their needs meet. It means that we have not had equal and widespread access to a rigorous curriculum for children and young people in the 16-to-19 system across the country—which is what they deserve.
Oral Answers to Questions
Josh MacAlister Excerpts(1 week, 4 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Alison Bennett (Mid Sussex) (LD)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)
Funded institutions for those aged 16 to 19 have the freedom to decide how to use their funding for the provision they offer, including whether they offer the international baccalaureate.
Alison Bennett
Varndean sixth-form college in Brighton is the only state-funded IB provider in Sussex. It has warned that, without the large programme uplift, the IB will become financially unviable. Many Mid Sussex students have gone on from Varndean to study engineering, medicine and maths at leading universities. Does the Minister think it right that this world-class qualification becomes available only in the private sector, entrenching a two-tier education system? Will he meet me and Varndean students to discuss the benefits of the IB for state-educated pupils and why this decision must be reversed?
Josh MacAlister
The Government made big decisions at the spending review to increase the overall funding available to 16-to-19 courses. Next financial year, there will be an increase of over £800 million. That means that per-pupil funding is going up substantially. The large programme uplift sits on top of that, and the Government have made the decision to prioritise the large programme uplift for students doing multiple A-levels in science, technology, engineering and maths subjects. We still support the international baccalaureate and recognise it as a programme that can work for many students.
Fleur Anderson (Putney) (Lab)
I welcome the Minister’s support for the international baccalaureate. Ashcroft technology academy in my constituency runs a successful IB programme. Will he confirm that the programme will still be funded and that pupils can still choose to study the international baccalaureate at Ashcroft academy?
Josh MacAlister
I know that my hon. Friend is a champion for Ashcroft academy and has visited it many times. I can confirm that the changes that the Government are making will mean that the international baccalaureate can still be studied. We are providing funding for 16-to-19 provision so that sixth-form colleges can make those decisions.
Layla Moran (Oxford West and Abingdon) (LD)
This week I have been inundated by families who send their children to Europa school just outside my constituency; they are so concerned by these changes. I taught the IB for 11 years, and I know full well the difference that its incredible curriculum can make to children’s lives. Does this policy direction not send a negative signal from the Government? I remind the Minister that it was a Labour Government who introduced the funding in the first place. Surely this is the wrong direction.
Josh MacAlister
The decision is essentially about where in the system resources go. Over 75% of students in receipt of extra support from the large programme uplift are studying A-levels, and we want to prioritise support for the vast majority of students who are studying A-levels and taking extra A-levels, including further maths. That is right for our economy, and it is also right for the vast majority of students. We still recognise the international baccalaureate as an important course and we want to support it.
Ms Polly Billington (East Thanet) (Lab)
I, too, have a school in my constituency that offers the international baccalaureate. Dane Court school in Broadstairs has an extremely successful programme in breaking down barriers to opportunity for a large number of pupils in an area of significant deprivation. Only 10% of the children in East Thanet succeed in passing the Kent test; we need to be able to ensure that those children and others get the maximum opportunities available. Will the Minister reassure me, the senior leadership team, and parents and children at Dane Court that the international baccalaureate will still be possible for those children and for future generations?
Josh MacAlister
I thank my hon. Friend for her advocacy for her constituents. This year, per-student funding is rising to £5,105—up from £4,843 last year. These decisions made across the further education system and for sixth-form colleges mean that institutions can make the best choices for their students, including, where appropriate, backing students to study the international baccalaureate.
Josh MacAlister
The system provides the level of funding necessary to 16-to-19 providers. The Government have made big decisions, which have not been backed by the Conservatives in spending reviews or Budgets, to ensure that the funding is there for colleges to make those choices. On top of that, there is the large programme uplift. In that respect, we are rightly making the decision to prioritise the vast majority of students who are taking more than three A-levels, especially in STEM subjects. We are prioritising those subjects, and we are being frank and honest about that choice. The international baccalaureate can be chosen by colleges where that is right for students.
Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Slough) (Lab)
Mr Jonathan Brash (Hartlepool) (Lab)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)
The Government’s spending watchdog reported in 2017 that planned free schools would add an estimated 57,500 more spare school places. We are taking a common-sense approach, so that we can prove value for money from every pound of taxpayer money spent.
Mr Brash
Residents in Wynyard, in my Hartlepool constituency, have waited for far too long, thanks primarily to the mess left by the Conservative party, for their new primary school, St Joseph’s, which has been caught up in this review. Understandably, parents are frustrated by the continued delays, so will the Minister commit to using every possible lever at his disposal to expedite the decision, so that Wynyard families can finally have access to the high-quality school provision that they have been promised for so long?
Josh MacAlister
My hon. Friend has been a vocal champion for St Joseph’s Catholic primary school since he entered this place last year. I want every child in the country to go to school in an appropriate building. His community wants certainty, and that is what we want too. An update will be provided later this year, and I would be happy to speak to him before that time.
Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)
I thank the Minister very much for his answers, and I thank the hon. Member for Hartlepool (Mr Brash) for setting the scene so very well. We in Northern Ireland are very keen to learn from the education system here. I believe that the Education Minister from the Northern Ireland Assembly—he is a colleague in my party, by the way, so I understand his interests in these matters—will be keen to listen to and hear the suggestion put forward by the Minister. Will the Minister share his ideas for Hartlepool with us in Northern Ireland to ensure that we can all benefit in this great United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland?
Josh MacAlister
In another part of my brief, I am already in touch with Ministers in devolved nations regarding children’s social care, and I would be very happy also to share wider learning from the school rebuilding programme.
Nick Timothy (West Suffolk) (Con)
One year ago, the Education Secretary paused plans to open 44 approved free schools. In January, she said that she was “working rapidly” to make a decision. That was nine months ago—enough time to make a baby, but not enough time for her to make up her mind. When will our Ministers tell those free school founders—among whom are some of the best education leaders in the country—if they can open great new schools?
Josh MacAlister
There is a choice here. We are debating how the Government, within only a few months of being elected, are making big progress across the education system. That includes big decisions made at fiscal events to invest capital into programmes such as this one, which at every opportunity the Conservatives have failed to support. We are able to make these decisions to improve our school estate only because of the decisions made at fiscal events.
Sarah Owen (Luton North) (Lab)
Matt Vickers (Stockton West) (Con)
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)
We have cut red tape, put in record investment and tilted the system in favour of young domestic talent, and the proof is in the pudding. Apprenticeship starts, participation and achievement are up, up, up under this Government.
Matt Vickers
Using funding delivered by the last Conservative Government, work is under way to deliver an incredible, brand new, purpose-built vocational training centre for the Neta Training Group in Stockton. It will offer youngsters the chance to get great skills and jobs. Does the Minister agree that we should be capping any debt-trap degree courses that fail to deliver employment opportunities and instead increasing the apprenticeship budget—maybe even doubling it—to give young people career-focused routes to success?
Josh MacAlister
This is where I think the last Government got it wrong. We can be pro-further education, pro-technical education and pro-higher education; there is absolutely no need to trade them off against one another. Under this Government, we have 120,000 new training opportunities, up to 30,000 foundation apprenticeship starts and an unprecedented £3 billion being invested in apprenticeships. It is great that the hon. Member and his constituents in Stockton are benefiting from that.
Mr Calvin Bailey (Leyton and Wanstead) (Lab)
Last week, I met representatives of Centrepoint. They highlighted that some 2,800 young people in my constituency are not in education, employment or training, despite having extensive STEM skills and a real drive to participate in that part of the economy. Connecting those young people with existing opportunities is a major challenge, and I would like to hear how such opportunities are being created through the exciting propositions of technical colleges and, perhaps, V-levels. What work is being done to ensure that those things are accessible to young people in constituencies such as mine?
Josh MacAlister
My hon. Friend is right to highlight this issue. A million young people in this country are not in education, employment or training, which is a moral stain that the Government are absolutely committed to doing everything they can to address. The future of our skills system sits right at the heart of that effort, and I encourage my hon. Friend to be in the Chamber for the statement later today to hear what the Government’s further plans are.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)
I thank the hon. Member for that important question. This is National Adoption Week, which I am sure Members across the House will want to celebrate, recognising the importance of adoption and the need to fill the adoption gap—about 1,500 adoptive parents for children are being waited for at the moment. We are looking at the future of the adoption and special guardianship support fund, which provides essential support, and we have tried to ensure that the scheme is accessible to as many families as possible.
Several hon. Members rose—
Liam Conlon (Beckenham and Penge) (Lab)
Josh MacAlister
England is an international outlier by not requiring the registration of electively home-educated children, and we are remedying that with the Bill’s measures. Information on non-educational activities will not be required for inclusion in the registers. I will happily meet my hon. Friend to discuss this further.
Claire Young (Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
Time and again in my constituency surgeries, I hear stories of children’s needs going unrecognised and unsupported for years. Given the aim of increasing mainstream inclusion, what are the Government doing to ensure that all teachers receive comprehensive SEND training?
Luke Akehurst (North Durham) (Lab)
Josh MacAlister
I thank my hon. Friend for his advocacy for his constituents and for the school concerned. A number of schemes are available that may be able to support the school with the situation it faces, and I would be happy to speak to him further about that.
Sir Julian Lewis (New Forest East) (Con)
The Arts and Humanities Research Council receives £70 million in public money to fund postgraduate research. What mechanism and powers does the Secretary of State have to check that such substantial funds are not squandered on politically tendentious projects, such as those exposed by Laurence Sleator on page 27 of The Times on Saturday? Will she perhaps take a look at the article and write to me?
Josh MacAlister
I am sure that we would be happy to look at the article, but the last thing that people outside this building want is politicians deciding what research should be done, in the same way as we do not want judges being appointed by politicians in this House either.
Jessica Toale (Bournemouth West) (Lab)
Last week I visited Oak academy’s new building—a net zero, solar-powered, inspiring environment for young people. I would love young people across my constituency, and across the rest of the country, to have the opportunity to learn in such environments, so can the Secretary of State tell me what her Department is doing to improve the environmental performance of our schools?
Josh MacAlister
My hon. Friend has been a very effective champion for Bournemouth on these matters. St Joseph’s school in her constituency is benefiting already from solar and other measures, thanks to the partnership with Great British Energy. It is projected to save the school £8,000 a year, which could be spent on extra support for pupils and teachers.
Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)
Over 50% of parents of children who have special educational needs have admitted to neglecting their own health because they are too busy prioritising the health of their children. What is the Minister doing to ensure that parents’ health and mental wellbeing are being prioritised in this very adversarial process?
Ian Roome (North Devon) (LD)
I have visited many schools in North Devon, and many are facing the dilemma of whether to fund essential maintenance or to lay off teaching assistants. What is the Minister doing to ensure that adequate funding reaches rural schools so that they do not have to cut teaching staff in order to balance the books?
Josh MacAlister
I am happy to correspond with the hon. Member about the situation facing that school. In relation to school buildings, a number of schemes are available to provide support.
Chris Webb (Blackpool South) (Lab)
In Blackpool, too many young people needing SEND placements have been sent outside the borough, often an hour away. There is a proposal on the table for two new SEND schools in Blackpool with 120 places, but it seems to be in limbo. Will the Minister agree to meet me to discuss this and how we can get adequate support for our great young people?
Helen Morgan (North Shropshire) (LD)
A serious fire at St Martin’s school in my constituency has left most of its secondary children without face-to-face education for nearly four weeks now. Will the Minister meet me to determine how we can ensure that the buildings are brought back into use as quickly as possible, and how the children can be brought back up to speed, so that they are not disadvantaged?
Josh MacAlister
I would be very happy to have a discussion with the hon. Lady about the arrangements, to ensure that we can get students back into proper classrooms as soon as possible.
Alex Mayer (Dunstable and Leighton Buzzard) (Lab)
A new school has been in the offing in Bidwell West for almost a decade now. The independent council promised me that places would be available from September 2027, but now appears to be backtracking. Is the Minister willing to meet me to discuss the obvious concerns of parents, many of whom moved into the new build estate because of the promise of a brand-new school?
Josh MacAlister
I would be very happy to find out more about the situation my hon. Friend describes, and to offer any help or support that we can.
Child Risk Disclosure Scheme
Josh MacAlister Excerpts(2 weeks, 3 days ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist) for securing a debate on this important subject, and for her powerful and heartfelt speech.
We are here today because of Maya Chappell, a two-year-old girl whose life was cruelly taken far too soon. Maya’s death was a tragedy. No child should suffer at the hands of someone entrusted to love them, and no family should endure such a loss. I begin by paying tribute to Maya’s great-aunts Gemma and Rachael, who I believe are here today. Their tireless campaigning has brought us together for this debate. Their petition, now signed by more than 6,000 people, calls for Maya’s law. It is a call born out of unimaginable pain but also a deep commitment to protect other children from harm. In Gemma’s words,
“it is a call for prevention, accountability and a united commitment to child safety”.
This is my first parliamentary duty as a Minister, so it is fitting that I am here to talk about keeping children safe, which is a top priority for this Government and, unquestionably, the top priority for me in my role as the new children and families Minister. Every child should feel safe and loved. Sadly, Maya’s family are not alone in calling for change; the stories of Star Hobson and Tony Hudgell have also been mentioned, and their families echo that call.
When I led the independent review of children’s social care, which my hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon and Consett referred to, I heard from families, professionals, frontline practitioners and many others who shared exactly those concerns. The child safeguarding practice review panel’s most recent annual report found that 81% of serious incidents involved poor co-ordination or handover between services. That theme has been repeated over many decades; to date, we have failed to grasp it.
That tells us one thing clearly: we need fundamental change. I believe that we are now delivering that through the most significant overhaul of children’s social care in a generation, backed by legislative change, which I will speak more about in a moment, and over £2 billion of investment in this spending review period. Through those reforms, we are laying the foundation for much better information sharing, introducing a responsive family help system, and significantly sharpening up our child protection arrangements. I think that is a comprehensive response to the lessons we have learned from Maya’s murder.
My hon. Friend set out that a principle of the child risk disclosure scheme is to enable proactive information sharing where a child is deemed at risk. With the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, we are ending misconceptions about when information can and cannot be shared. The new information-sharing duty places a legal obligation on relevant organisations to share information to safeguard and promote the welfare of children. That replaces a duty only to have regard to the need to safeguard and promote the wellbeing of children, which is a significant shift.
[Carolyn Harris in the Chair]
The duty responds directly to feedback from my independent review, and it will blow away the fog of confusion between agencies about when it is and is not appropriate to share information. Crucially, and linked specifically to Maya’s story, the duty also states that information about other individuals, if relevant, must be shared. That will allow practitioners to act. In the coming months, we will be consulting on and publishing statutory guidance to support practitioners in implementing the duty, and I welcome contributions from Maya’s family—from Rachael and Gemma—to the process.
I agree with those campaigning for Maya’s law that we need to change the law, and that is what we are doing right now. Given the progress of the current reforms—particularly the information-sharing duty, and the passage of the Bill through Parliament, which is at an advanced stage—I do not believe that now is the time to introduce a child risk disclosure scheme specifically. However, many of the proposals are reflected in what we are taking forward as a Government with the wider children’s social care reforms, and there are other aspects, which I will also mention.
Alongside the introduction of a duty to share information, we are exploring how to support frictionless sharing of information between agencies through technological improvements. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill introduces a single unique identifier for children—in my first week in this role, I went to Wigan to see the pilot for that being successfully rolled out—to meet our manifesto commitment to stop children falling through the cracks of services. We are working closely with NHS England, the Department of Health and Social Care and local authorities to pilot the implementation of that programme, using the NHS number as the identifier.
A single unique identifier will not solve the whole problem on its own, but we believe that it will allow much freer sharing of information between agencies to enable them to spot links and make sure that children do not fall through the gaps. Once needs are identified—this leads to the second major plank of change that we have under way—our reforms will ensure that children and families receive support when they need it, through much more extensive family help services.
That will be delivered through the families first partnership programme, a new model for supporting families earlier to prevent problems from escalating. It has been tested in a number of areas across the country, but we are committed to rolling it out nationally. We want local areas, children’s social care, police, health, education and other partners to deliver the programme as highly skilled, multidisciplinary teams that get around families early in order to provide support when it is needed.
My hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon and Consett urged me to commit to cross-departmental collaboration to ensure that safeguarding partners work together effectively to uphold their responsibilities. We published the “Families First Partnership Programme Guide” in March—we are updating it for next March—and we are working closely with the Home Office and the Department of Health and Social Care to deliver this work. I will chair a new keeping children safe board, which will involve Ministers across Government, to ensure that we deliver these changes effectively.
It is not enough just to share information and provide intensive support to families; we also need a much more responsive and decisive child protection system where there is significant harm. Building on more proactive and intensive family help, we will be making major changes to child protection in England—some of the most dramatic in years. We are introducing new multi-agency child protection teams, which will bring together safeguarding partners so that, where there are concerns about significant harm, we are not waiting for agencies to refer to one another or come together for a meeting. Instead, they will be nested together permanently in a shared multi-agency arrangement.
My hon. Friend rightly outlined the need for the police to protect children from a wide range of harms, not just those traditionally associated with criminal activity. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill introduces a duty on each of those multi-agency child protection teams to include police representatives nominated by the chief officer for the area. There will be, in statute, a requirement on the police to be part of those teams. These reforms will ensure that strong multi-agency protocols are in place locally to better protect children from significant harm.
Liz Twist
Clearly, there is a whole lot of activity going on to improve child protection, but we think there are some significant gaps. Would the Minister be prepared to meet me and the family so that we can explain where we think the gaps are and how we could improve the legislation?
Josh MacAlister
Of course I will.
All of us in this room agree that keeping children safe is a top priority. To quote my hon. Friend, the lives of the children we have been talking about were still important, still cherished and still worth protecting. To do that effectively, we need to share data, provide intensive help to families when they need it and sharpen up our children’s social care system.
My hon. Friend made a number of asks of me. We are firmly committed to working across Departments to improve how safeguarding partners work together and ensure that police are fulfilling their obligations for children, and yes, I will meet her and Maya’s family to hear their concerns and the changes they wish to see. I would also welcome their views and experiences being heard as these changes are progressed through the roll-out—
Motion lapsed (Standing Order No. 10(6)).
Kinship Carers
Josh MacAlister Excerpts(11 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Janet Daby
My hon. Friend makes a significant point. There is lots more that needs to be done in this space, and her point demonstrates that much more work is needed.
Josh MacAlister (Whitehaven and Workington) (Lab)
I thank the Minister for giving way and for her leadership on this really important issue; I know she cares a lot about it. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Hitchin (Alistair Strathern) on securing the debate, and I would like to say a huge thank you to the brilliant kinship carers here today and across the country for the amazing work they do, as the silent, often unheard, majority of the children’s social care system.
The previous Government had the right prescription but probably the wrong dose, as I have said on a number of occasions. I welcome the fact that the Government have announced the next wave of funding for kinship care and, in the Budget, an additional £250 million in 2025-26 for reforming children’s social care, with a major commitment at the spending review to look at the whole system. I congratulate the Minister on securing that.
I would like to reiterate three quick and simple points. I ask the Minister to find a way to secure parental leave for all kinship carers; to ensure that we find a way of helping local authorities to legally back family-led plans where they are an alternative to care; and to follow guidance that the Department for Education has published through Foundations, which recommends, based on evidence, that financially backing kinship carers as an alternative to foster care works.
Janet Daby
I thank my hon. Friend for his significant work and knowledge in this area, which he keenly demonstrates, and for his many significant points, which we will continue to consider.