Antisemitism: University Campuses

Debate between Josh MacAlister and Jim Shannon

Tuesday 30th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[Josh MacAlister]

The hon. Member is absolutely right to make that point. To pick up one thread of today’s debate, a number of hon. Members have raised the power of algorithms, which feed off people’s fury and anger and the differences that exist between them. Many of the themes highlighted in this debate could equally apply to other groups in society where our attention is also needed.

Government-funded training is already supporting university staff and leaders to recognise antisemitism, support Jewish students and respond appropriately when concerns arise. Last week, we agreed to fund projects through our innovation fund to help students navigate misinformation, engage constructively with difficult issues and develop a deeper understanding of different faiths and communities. We are also developing a new community cohesion framework with students in partnership with the University of Salford and the National Union of Students. Alongside that work, we continue to support University Jewish Chaplaincy to provide pastoral wellbeing and practical support to Jewish students across the country.

In his opening speech, my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley asked about the statutory framework. Given the time remaining, I will give the brief update that the Office of the Independent Adjudicator is due to update its good practice framework for higher education providers in handling reports of harassment later this year. In addition, we are working with the sector to improve transparency and accountability for tackling antisemitic abuse. We are also working with Universities UK to undertake a rapid assessment of institutional disciplinary and incident reporting processes and we will develop recommendations and priority actions in autumn this year.

[Jim Shannon]

I thank the Minister for that very comprehensive answer. In my contribution, I suggested that when universities fall short of their obligations, their vice chancellors should be called in to answer to a parliamentary Committee as to why no action had been taken. Does the Minister consider that that would be an effective way of ensuring that universities protect Jewish students and those of Jewish faith? Could calling in vice chancellors be a way of squeezing universities—and squeezing them tight?

[Josh MacAlister]

The hon. Member is right to highlight the essential aspect of accountability. The Office for Students has been given additional powers in recent years. It is also true that the scale of the challenge that we see with antisemitism on university campuses, and the challenge that many universities are facing in meeting their obligations to uphold the freedom of speech while also creating the climate and culture necessary for freedom from intimidation, may lead a Select Committee to hold an inquiry on that. It would, of course, be a matter for Parliament and a Select Committee to do so, but if that were to happen, the Department for Education would be very interested in its findings.

We know that many of the conspiracy theories and hateful tropes that underpin antisemitism are also features of extremist ideologies. Left unchallenged, they can create an environment in which radicalisation becomes more likely. At their most serious, they can form part of a pathway towards terrorism. Prevent data shows that in the year to March 2025, there were 8,778 referrals, 21% of which were linked to extreme right-wing concerns and 10% to Islamist extremism. Although Prevent does not record antisemitism as a stand-alone category, those figures illustrate how antisemitic narratives can, and often do, form part of extremist worldviews that carry a risk of terrorism or serious harm.

Most antisemitic incidents fall well below the threshold for Prevent intervention. Nevertheless, the data demonstrates that, in the most serious cases, ideas rooted in historical antisemitic prejudice can become part of a trajectory towards terrorism. That is why, through our wider Protecting What Matters programme, we are taking action to challenge antisemitism and extremism wherever they arise. We are strengthening oversight of universities’ Prevent duties; updating guidance on external speakers and events, which is due to come out very soon; improving our ability to identify emerging extremist activity; enhancing whistleblowing protections; and increasing transparency around incidents of antisemitism.

Lifelong Learning: “University of the Air” White Paper

Debate between Josh MacAlister and Jim Shannon

Tuesday 16th June 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir Desmond. I start by congratulating my hon. Friend the Member for Southport (Patrick Hurley) on securing this very timely debate and on the characteristically thoughtful case he made. I also give credit to the hon. Member for South Antrim (Robin Swann), a graduate of the Open University himself, who reminded us of the analogue age of VCRs and the magic of Sir David Attenborough.

I also thank the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) for highlighting the genuine inclusivity of the Open University from its inception. He was also right to highlight the importance of prisoner education. Although it is not within my area of responsibility, I am very passionate about it, and I believe that the Open University and other providers have a really important role to play, given the captive nature of the audience and the chance for prison to be a place where people can genuinely turn their lives around.

I want to answer the question about UCAS before I turn to the wider debate. The Open University chooses to manage applications directly, partly because of the need for flexibility beyond the normal academic cycle, but information about OU courses, including modular courses, is available on the UCAS website.

I am keen not to get drawn too far away from the topic of the Open University, but I will respond in short to the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Windsor (Jack Rankin), who raised issues regarding level 7 apprenticeships. This is an area simply of disagreement on policy and on where the resources that sit behind the apprenticeships levy—which is now the growth and skills levy—should rest. I am really keen, as is the Education Secretary, for those resources to be targeted very much at those who might not have taken the university path and for those entry-level apprenticeship routes to be funded to the max. That is why that policy decision was made. I stand by it and believe it was the right decision on balance for the use of those resources.

My hon. Friend the Member for Southport speaks in this debate not just as an advocate for lifelong learning but as living proof of its potential. As he spoke about movingly, his example is of someone who enrolled with the OU at the age of 30, and five years later emerged with both an undergraduate degree and a master’s degree to their name. That, for me, is the Open University’s mission in a nutshell—not a makeshift second chance, but a genuinely world-class route to opportunity for people who were not on academic pathways at the age of 18. That is why his advocacy carries such weight. In Southport, he has carried that conviction into the community at the heart of his constituency, championing the learning festival that took place in the town last year and being a strong advocate for improving educational opportunities more broadly. I have been lobbied many times about school buildings by him, so I can attest to that.

As my hon. Friend explained, it will be 60 years ago next February since another Labour Minister, Jennie Lee, published the White Paper, “A University of the Air”. She did so in the face of immense scepticism. Whitehall was snooty, the press was cynical and much of the establishment argued that the money should be spent elsewhere, but Jennie Lee was, in Harold Wilson’s words, “a tigress”. At a famous Cabinet meeting at Chequers just before the 1966 election, she argued that while the national health service was the greatest creation of the post-war Labour Government, the “University of the Air” would make

“just as much difference to the country.”

The White Paper made a radical argument that higher education should be open to all, regardless of background or prior qualifications, that learning should be flexible, rigorous and lifelong, and that new technology would carry academic excellence far beyond the walls of traditional institutions. Jennie Lee won that argument, and 60 years on, every part of that vision—open access, flexibility and technology in service of excellence—reads less like history and more like a description of the task that sits in front of us today.

The Open University, the institution founded as a consequence of that White Paper, is today the largest academic institution in the UK, with students in all 650 parliamentary constituencies. Since 1969, it has taught more than 2.5 million students worldwide. Three quarters of its undergraduates arrive with no previous higher education qualifications. The open door that Jennie Lee promised is still open.

In the last five years alone, more than 15,000 people who began studying without any A-levels have earned higher education qualifications through the Open University. Two thirds of its students are working while they study. It is learning that fits around life—not the other way around. The OU was never second best: at the last assessment, 82% of its research impact was rated world leading or internationally excellent, and last year it was awarded gold—the highest ranking—in the teaching excellence framework.

[Jim Shannon]

We all, including the Minister, recognise that the Open University reaches out to those who are perhaps isolated and lonely. It gives them an opportunity to focus their attention on a degree, thereby giving them hope for the future. That is sometimes underestimated, but it is critical.

[Josh MacAlister]

I completely agree. I will turn now to the Government’s actions, which will take the Open University to its next chapter, so that those opportunities are spread even more across our great country.

Last October, we published the “Post-16 education and skills” White Paper. There is a powerful alignment between the Open University’s mission to widen access and our own vision, set out in that White Paper, for a world-leading skills system that breaks down barriers to opportunity. The strategy in the White Paper is the blueprint for delivering our new target for two thirds of young people to be participating in higher-level learning—academic, technical or apprenticeships. We are determined to break the damaging link between background and success, and we want more people from all backgrounds to be able to access higher education as part of that.

As part of our reforms, the lifelong learning entitlement —a policy from the previous Government that I am very pleased we are continuing, with cross-party support—represents one of the most significant student finance reforms in a generation. For the first time, it establishes a single, flexible funding system covering levels 4 to 6 across further and higher education, enabling people to learn, upskill and retrain throughout their working lives.

The rationale for the entitlement is clear. More than a third of vacancies go unfilled due to skills shortages, and around 80% of the 2030 workforce are already in employment. However, the current system was largely designed for younger, full-time students and lacks the flexibility that adults in work need. The LLE will expand access to higher-quality, flexible education and training, promote learner mobility and ensure that providers can respond to the needs of learners, employers and the wider economy.

Sixty years ago, a White Paper of just a few pages was dismissed as vague, insubstantial and impractical. Today, the institution it created has taught more than 2 million people, with my hon. Friend the Member for Southport among them. That is the test that Jennie Lee set us: not whether an idea is convenient, but whether it changes lives. She insisted that there could be no question of offering students a makeshift project, inferior in quality to other universities. Sixty years on, that standard still binds us.

From January next year funding will, for the first time, follow the learner, module by module, at any stage of life. Our ambition that two thirds of young people reach higher-level learning is matched by an entitlement that lasts to 60, because opportunity should not have a closing date. Jennie Lee’s revolution was to say that the door to education should never close behind someone. The task of the next 60 years is to hold that door open wider still, in Southport and in every community like it. When our learners thrive, our country thrives.

Children’s Social Care: Enduring Relationships Strategy

Debate between Josh MacAlister and Jim Shannon

Thursday 4th June 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh MacAlister]

My hon. Friend and neighbour is right to highlight the leadership of Councillor Emma Williamson, who is herself care-experienced. She has brought that experience to political office in a way that is making real change happen across Cumberland. One of the things I was proudest to attend as a Member of Parliament, and as the Minister for Children and Families, was the launch of the enrichment event in my constituency last year. It is what Emma refers to as the bank of mam and dad. It is a fund that Emma and the team at Cumberland have set up to create an account with money that can go to young people who have something happening in their life. It could be to buy them a vehicle or to put down a deposit on a house. It is about having that flexibility through family finances that many of us benefit from but take for granted. Those who are care leavers often do not have it.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I thank the Minister so much for his positive statement—I do so not in the salubrious way that the right hon. Member for New Forest West (Sir Desmond Swayne) did, but with the same sincerity. I also thank the hon. Member for Twickenham (Munira Wilson) for all that she has done in this House for children. It is perhaps not always recognised, but it should be, because her contribution has been significant.

This is a massive issue back home in Strangford and across Northern Ireland. The Minister will know that Northern Ireland heavily outpaces England in keeping children within their wider family circle, with kinship and friends care at more than 50%. It is clear that children are happier if kept with siblings and in familiar circumstances, so how will the Minister and the Government further support those who would consider kinship care but are hampered in their ability to access appropriate housing for family care and need bigger houses? How can the Minister ensure that larger family homes are available UK-wide for those truly in need?

[Josh MacAlister]

That is a great question, because it gets to the heart of how the system behaves when it finds a parent who is perhaps struggling with a substance misuse problem, or is in a violent relationship, or has mental health needs and cannot continue to look after the child by themselves, but could be an important part of that child’s life for the foreseeable future, and when there are relatives saying, “We can help. We can be part of the solution. We do not need this child to go into the care system.” There needs to be a mechanism to fund those solutions, and that is what family network support packages do. The £2.4 billion that I referred to is available to fund those family network support packages. In the kinship zones, we are expecting much higher use of those FNSPs so that we can properly evaluate things. When I looked at the differences in the care population around the UK in the review, it was striking that the strength of civil society in Northern Ireland was one of the reasons, perhaps—this is just an idea—why communities were better able to come together around those children who might be at risk of going into care.

Young Adult Carers: Education and Training

Debate between Josh MacAlister and Jim Shannon

Thursday 23rd April 2026 Westminster Hall

[The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education (Josh MacAlister)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mrs Harris. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) for securing this debate, the second Westminster Hall debate he has instigated. He continues to be a fantastic champion for these young people and does a brilliant job of putting the spotlight firmly where it should be in this place. I also recognise the contribution from the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon), who did a wonderful job of explaining the reality of what it means to be a young adult carer or young carer using personal stories, which are often what move parliamentarians the most.

I fully recognise the difficulties that young carers and young adult carers face. They make an often overlooked and misunderstood contribution supporting family members and friends. The sacrifices they make at such a young age can be immense. Earlier this year, my noble Friend the Minister for Skills met a group of young carers at the launch of the report on the barriers to education for young adult carers by the APPG led by my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow. The Opposition spokesperson, the hon. Member for Meriden and Solihull East (Saqib Bhatti), mentioned the role of the Minister for School Standards, who also has a lead responsibility for this. I reassure Members that the issue cuts across a number of portfolios in the Department and is an interest and focus for all of us.

The APPG chaired by my hon. Friend the Member for Harlow is driving important work to support young carers across the country. The stories of young carers, including those I have heard as a Member of Parliament, are inspiring and bring to life the challenges they face when caring for loved ones, supporting themselves and their family financially, and accessing education and training, which is the focus of this debate.

This Government offer a wide range of high-quality education and training opportunities for young people so that they can get on in life and get the skills they need for a chosen career. The Government’s mission is about breaking down barriers to opportunity, which applies particularly to groups such as young carers. However, we know that group often faces more difficulties and challenges in accessing such opportunities than their peers. That is why the Government are actively working to ensure that changes under way across education and social care, which apply to many groups of young people, deliberately improve outcomes for young carers specifically—be that through better inclusion in education or a focus on better whole-family support and family help through changes to the children’s social care system.

We are making progress. There were a number of references to the importance of data. We are shining a light on the educational disadvantage faced by young carers by publishing, for the first time, attainment data at both key stage 2 and key stage 4 last autumn. I recognise that that piece of work has carried over between Governments; it is a good example of important work continuing regardless of party stance and despite the colour of the Government at any given moment. That evidence is driving change. For example, the new Ofsted education inspection framework introduced last November will put a direct focus on the needs of young carers. As Ofsted can be important as a motivating force for decisions by schools, although it has limitations at times, that also means that by putting it firmly in the framework, school leaders are attending to it in the way that is needed.

The Minister for Care chairs a regular cross-Government meeting with Ministers from the Department for Work and Pensions, the Department for Business and Trade and the Department for Education to consider how best to provide unpaid carers of all ages with the recognition and support they deserve. As has been mentioned, we are preparing a cross-Government action plan for unpaid carers, which will be published later this year. It will include action specifically to strengthen further support for young adult carers. We are also committed to providing bursaries for further education students aged 16 to 19 so that young carers can seek support for essential costs, such as books, equipment and travel, to help them stay in education. For those going into higher education, we are providing adult dependants’ grants for carers, and new maintenance grants will be available for students from low-income households.

Hon. Members have mentioned the Milburn review. I have had the chance to speak to Alan Milburn specifically about concerns to do with NEET rates for care-experienced young people. When I next have the opportunity to speak to him about his work, I will raise the importance of young carers, too.

A number of hon. Members have mentioned carer’s allowance. I recognise the issues around the 21-hour rule, which I appreciate can be a source of genuine frustration for young carers and their families. It is a long-standing principle that the benefits system does not normally support full-time students; rather, they are supported by the educational maintenance system. Part-time students can receive carer’s allowance if they meet the entitlement conditions.

I recognise the issues for a number of students finishing school and in programmes of study that are more than 21 hours. That means that many young carers who are also full-time FE students cannot claim carer’s allowance as a result of the 21-hour rule. The Minister for Social Security and Disability has taken a strong interest in this issue, including by meeting with Carers Trust, Carers UK, and the Learning and Work Institute to discuss it, and I am happy to follow up with him after this debate. How we can best identify and support young carers to combine study with their caring responsibilities where they can, including taking account of changes in the education system, will be one of our priorities going forward for this group of young people.

[Jim Shannon]

Not to interfere with the flow of the Minister’s reply—he is saying positive stuff, and I thank him for that—but perhaps the hon. Member for Harlow (Chris Vince) should be at that meeting and the follow-up, if that would be agreeable. The hon. Member could feed back to us, as participants in this debate, on how it went, if that is okay with the Minister.

[Josh MacAlister]

My hon. Friend the Member for Harlow will do a much better job of convincing people than anyone else in this room, so I will gladly make sure that he is the focus of attention in that conversation. It is very much my intention to follow up with the Minister for Social Security and Disability and ensure that a conversation takes place.

I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important matter. He has his London marathon bib sat next to him, and mine has just been delivered—on a whole range of fronts, he is raising attention and money for good causes, including this weekend. For this, for his many years of campaigning, and for his work as a teacher, we all thank him.

Young carers and young adult carers often put the needs of others before their own. They make an enormous contribution to the wellbeing of their families, their neighbourhoods, their communities and the country. They deserve to be championed, and to be assured that we will support them in return for their actions. However, the system needs to improve to meet the developing needs of children and young carers. They must be at the heart of our opportunity mission. I look forward to helping to progress some of these issues in the months and years ahead.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Josh MacAlister and Jim Shannon

Monday 20th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh MacAlister]

I thank my hon. Friend for drawing the House’s attention to Simone, who is sitting in the Gallery. She is a wonderful Cumbrian, and a fantastic example of the excellence of school leaders and headteachers throughout the country. She has stewarded the school through a tumultuous few years, and with our Government support we will ensure that the new school setting is there for children who will need it in the future. Renewing our school estate is a massive challenge for the country: it is not just about building new schools, but about getting ahead of the curve so that we can modernise and retrofit existing school buildings that would otherwise have needed rebuilding altogether in 10 or 20 years’ time.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

RAAC—reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete—has been an huge issue here in Britain, but we have some examples back home in Northern Ireland as well. It is important that we share the way in which we address these problems. The Minister is always helpful, and I thank him for that. Will he contact the Education Minister in Northern Ireland to ensure that he and the Government can share what they have learnt here with us in Northern Ireland, so that we can address the issue in a similar way?

[Josh MacAlister]

The RAAC crisis here in England highlighted wider issues with the legacy of the school estate that England is now having to reckon with. I believe that we are now on top of that issue, and the Government are committed to stripping RAAC out of all schools in the years to come and ensuring that we have the school estate that we need. We have learnt a huge amount through that process, and I should be very glad to connect the hon. Member with relevant colleagues in the Department for Education and with Ministers in the Northern Irish Government.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Josh MacAlister and Jim Shannon

Monday 1st December 2025 Commons Chamber

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

The NSPCC revealed that in 2022-23 some 9,000 sexual abuse offences that were recorded by police involved an online element. What has been done in schools to improve children’s safety online and to ensure that whatever changes need to be made are made now?

[Josh MacAlister]

Strengthening our child protection system is a key priority for this Government. Very soon we will bring forward plans for the child protection authority. The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill contains a number of measures that would make a big difference to the safety of children across the UK, although those measures are unfortunately being blocked and frustrated by colleagues in other corners of this House.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Josh MacAlister and Jim Shannon

Monday 20th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[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.

Nuclear Industry: Cumbria

Debate between Josh MacAlister and Jim Shannon

Monday 14th October 2024 Commons Chamber

[Josh MacAlister]

I thank my hon. Friend for the intervention, and given that my entire speech is dedicated to that very point, I will gladly agree with her. West Cumbrians are incredibly proud of the part we played in the first clean energy revolution. We need only speak to some of those who worked at the power plant during its 47 years in operation to hear the pride in their voices.

After Calder Hall came another 10 nuclear power plants in 10 years—we opened 10 in 10 years.

[Jim Shannon (Strangford) (DUP)]

I commend the hon. Gentleman for securing the debate. He is right to point to the 10 power stations that were built, but if I may, I will gently remind him of the one that did not happen—although not as a result of what he says. Northern Ireland and the devolved nations have an important role to play in nuclear power provision. Almost 70 years ago there were plans to build Northern Ireland’s first atomic power station in County Tyrone, but ultimately they fell through. It is so important that we collectively have the facilities necessary to advance our nuclear power. Does he agree that, alongside his constituency and other areas of the mainland UK, more must be done to ensure that the devolved nations, including Northern Ireland, are considered for manufacturing bases and as potential areas for power stations in the future?

[Josh MacAlister]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for the intervention and I am glad to hear he is not blaming me for the decades-old issue with nuclear power in Northern Ireland. I agree with him that every corner of the United Kingdom could benefit from its energy output.

Richard Butler said at the time that Calder Hall was opened:

“It may be that after 1965 every new power station being built will be an atomic power station.”

From our dependence on fossil fuel towards the end of the 20th century, however, we know that that was not the case. It was the last Labour Government that reignited interest in new nuclear in 2005. The then Prime Minister, Sir Tony Blair, announced a review of the Government’s energy policy in order to reduce our reliance on foreign imports and tackle the threat of climate change. He recognised that we could not do that with renewables alone and he rightly and firmly put civil nuclear power back on the table.

In 2009, following an announcement by the then—and current—Energy Secretary, my right hon. Friend the Member for Doncaster North (Ed Miliband), we had ambitious plans for 10 sites to be the home of a new fleet of nuclear power stations, including three in Cumbria. The aim was for that fleet to shift the UK decisively from fossil fuels to clean, dependable power, to safeguard our nuclear skills and to provide energy security for decades into the 21st century. Moorside in my constituency, Hinkley, Sizewell, Hartlepool, Heysham, Wylfa, Oldbury and Bradwell were the communities identified to deliver that mission.

How many of them have a new nuclear power station today, 15 years on? Zero. Under the Conservatives, only one new nuclear project, Hinkley, was given the full go- ahead, and none opened during their time in Government. Fourteen years squandered—not only that, but we actually went backwards, with new nuclear projects collapsing on their watch.