Oral Answers to Questions

Lindsay Hoyle Excerpts

Monday 20th April 2026 Commons Chamber

[Josh MacAlister]

This Government made changes to the apprenticeship levy and have introduced the growth and skills levy to focus the apprenticeship system where it should be focused. Most Members across the House would agree that with the apprenticeship levy—now the growth and skills levy—we needed originally to create routes for those who were not able to go to university to achieve level 4 and above qualifications. That is where this Government are focusing our attention and we will not apologise for that, because those are the young people who are missing out on opportunities at the moment and need an apprenticeship system that is focused on them.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Chair of the Education Committee.

[Helen Hayes (Dulwich and West Norwood) (Lab)]

I recently met a young constituent who is hoping to start a legal apprenticeship. He told me that he has had to research each apprenticeship opportunity himself and, unlike his peers who are applying to university, he is having to apply in the crucial weeks before his A-levels, when he needs to be revising. The Government rejected the Education Committee’s recommendation that information on apprenticeships should be available via UCAS, so that students have a single source of all post-16 and post-18 opportunities, and that the timescale for applications should be aligned with university applications. Will the Minister update the House on what the Government are doing to make apprenticeships available to young people on a more equitable basis?

--- Later in debate ---

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Saqib Bhatti (Meriden and Solihull East) (Con)]

Apprenticeships should be the building blocks of a stronger economy. That is why the Conservatives are pledging to double the number. If the Minister has done his homework, he will know that any increase in apprenticeship numbers is due to the last-minute rush to do level 7, which this Government cancelled. In fact, if level 7 apprenticeships are stripped out of the figures, apprenticeship vacancies are at their lowest since 2020. With youth unemployment at an all-time high and apprenticeship vacancies at their lowest, it is time for the Minister to come clean: this Government are failing young people, are they not?

[Josh MacAlister]

The Conservatives’ new deal is funded by cutting opportunities in higher education. The Tory plan—[Interruption.] The Opposition Front Benchers’ proposal—

[Mr Speaker]

Order. This is a question to the Minister, not about what the Opposition might be doing.

[Josh MacAlister]

I apologise, Mr Speaker.

The proposals we have set out as a Government are all about expanding opportunities so that we get young people out of worklessness and into job opportunities. That is why we have set out a new deal for young people. To put it politely, the shadow Minister’s proposals borrow from a number of the features that we have set out in our plan. Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery.

--- Later in debate ---

[Josh MacAlister]

We take this issue extremely seriously, but the description given by the right hon. and learned Member is of her own legacy in government as a Conservative politician. She is now a Reform politician. Nowhere in her question was an apology for the appalling track record of creating the plan 2 student loans system in the first place and administering it in a way that has led to the results that she describes.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Saqib Bhatti (Meriden and Solihull East) (Con)]

As the Minister said, on 23 March the Department told universities that weekend courses do not qualify for funding. The Student Loans Company’s own guidance changed only this year, and the issue affected 20,000 students, including those in key professions, such as nurses. The Secretary of State has been taken to court by nine universities, the National Union of Students is demanding that she halt her clawback, and Martin Lewis has said that this is an almighty mess. I heard what the Minister had to say, but I know that this Government always find someone else to blame, so will he confirm that any aggressive debt collection will absolutely be stopped and that payments will not be demanded from innocent students?

--- Later in debate ---

[Bridget Phillipson]

The right hon. Gentleman is right in saying that while falling rolls present a particularly pronounced challenge in London, we are seeing the issue right across the country. We will work with the sector to develop a framework for the use of mainstream school space, including pressures such as demographic change, and we intend to publish that in the autumn. I note the point that he makes about small rural schools. We want to make sure that those schools can support their local communities, and we will keep under review all the funding that we operate to ensure that that is a reality.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister—welcome to the Front Bench.

[Sir Ashley Fox (Bridgwater) (Con)]

Thank you, Mr Speaker. One reason for improved academic standards in our schools under the last Government was the ability for good schools to expand and for failing schools to be put under new leadership. How will the Secretary of State ensure that underachieving schools with falling numbers are transformed with new and rigorous leadership, rather than conscripting unwilling parents to send their children to them?

[Bridget Phillipson]

I do not recognise the characterisation offered by the hon. Gentleman. He will know that through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, we are making changes that will allow local authorities and local areas to manage school places within their communities better, especially where we are seeing demographic change. Let me add that far too many schools were not serving children well—that was a situation that we inherited—but we are being taking firmer and swifter action to support those schools through our regional improvement for standards and excellence initiative. We cannot wait for late-stage failure before we go in and make change happen. Children and families deserve much more than that, and they deserve much better than the failed approach of the party opposite.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

With falling school rolls in Twickenham, across London and in other parts of the country, school budgets are coming under increasing pressure that is compounded by the underfunding of teachers’ pay rises, breakfast clubs and free school meals. Data from the House of Commons Library predicts a £4.4 billion black hole in funding for teachers’ pay rises alone over the next three years, and there is no way in which “productivity savings” can bridge that gap. Will the Secretary of State commit herself to funding those rises fully, so that headteachers are not forced to cut the number of support staff and extracurricular activities that are so important to children’s education and wellbeing?

--- Later in debate ---

[Josh MacAlister]

The OfS system in place at the moment allows for students to complain about breaches of freedom of speech. The written statement laid this morning by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State is all about expanding that coverage to staff, visiting lecturers and other speakers, as well as ensuring we have a system under which the OfS can go back to institutions and hold them to account.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Minister.

[Jack Rankin (Windsor) (Con)]

My hon. Friend the Member for Gordon and Buchan (Harriet Cross) is absolutely right. Whether it is Zionist views, gender critical perspectives, climate scepticism, or challenging the perceived wisdom that diversity is our strength with the need to put terrorism barriers around Christmas markets, there is a clear two-tier approach to free speech on our campuses, and students are the nub of it, which is exactly why the Higher Education (Freedom of Speech) Act gave students the right to go to the Office for Students. Why can academics and visiting speakers complain under this proposal, but not students? It is called the Office for Students, or is the Minister planning to rename it “the office for everybody on campus except students”?

--- Later in debate ---

[The Minister for School Standards (Georgia Gould)]

We are deeply grateful for the service of our armed forces families. I would welcome the opportunity to meet my hon. Friend, and I recently met members of the all-party parliamentary group on the armed forces. We will be bringing forward further admissions reforms shortly.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the shadow Secretary of State.

[Laura Trott (Sevenoaks) (Con)]

We learnt last week that in the tragic Southport case, when the headteacher warned about the killer’s increasing extreme behaviour, the social worker accused the headteacher of racially stereotyping the pupil as

“a black boy with a knife”.

The result was that the warnings were rewritten in many cases. And that was not a one-off. We know it also happened in the Sara Sharif case, where

“race was a bar to reporting possible child abuse”,

and we saw the failure repeatedly with the grooming gangs scandal. Being too scared of causing offence means children are being harmed, so I ask the Secretary of State directly: what concrete action is she taking to stop repeated cases of political correctness overruling the safeguarding of children?

--- Later in debate ---

[Georgia Gould]

I thank my hon. Friend for raising that critical issue. It is an area on which we are already working closely with health colleagues, both in our support for families but also in response to children’s SEND needs. We have a meeting later, where we will discuss the matter.

[Mr Speaker]

I call the Liberal Democrat spokesperson.

[Munira Wilson (Twickenham) (LD)]

I was deeply alarmed by reports that Labour MPs were being given pre-written feedback to share, following consultation sessions with constituents on the Government’s special needs reforms. The Secretary of State promised to put families at the heart of her changes, so will she assure parents and carers that the SEND consultation is entirely free from political interference and that they will be listened to, especially with regard to their rights?