Holidays During School Term Time

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Monday 27th October 2025 Westminster Hall

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

It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Ms Lewell. I start by recognising the strength of feeling on term-time absences from school, particularly among the almost 182,000 people who signed the petition. Family life is precious, and there are so many pressures bearing down on families that serve to make time spent together relaxing and enjoying one another’s company all the more important. Going away on holiday; major family celebrations; religious holidays not currently reflected in our school calendar; caring responsibilities; parental separation—a whole range of circumstances can seem like more important priorities than being in school every single day of the school year, but I will set out three reasons why I do not agree that 10 days of permitted absence a year is the right way to address these concerns.

First, and most importantly, all the evidence indicates that it is in children’s best interests to be in school with their peers as much as they possibly can. The link between attendance at school and attainment is strong: the Government’s data shows that key stage 2 pupils in year 6 who attended almost every day were 1.3 times more likely to achieve the expected standard in reading, writing and maths, compared with pupils who attended 90% to 95% of the time. Missing 10 days of school a year reduced the likelihood of achieving the expected standard by 25%.

For key stage 4 pupils in year 11, the situation is even starker. Missing 10 days of school reduces the chance of gaining a grade 5 in English or maths by 50%. That is because education builds from the foundations of a subject upwards. Missing days of education results in gaps in knowledge and understanding, which can affect a child’s ability to grasp future concepts properly, meaning that they never fully catch up.

Secondly, a major concern of many petitioners is the excessive cost of holidays outside term time. Holidays are really important, and families should be able to go away. It is absolutely wrong for travel companies to exploit the constraints of families with children of school age by hiking up their prices during the school holidays. The practice is simply unfair—but the solution to the unfair pricing policies of travel companies is not to allow parents to remove their children from school to be able to afford a holiday; it is for travel companies to do the right thing and even out their pricing over the year, so that parents of school-age children are not penalised for doing the right thing and keeping their children in school.

Thirdly, I am concerned about the impact of a change in policy to allow authorised absence for some parents on the attendance of the most vulnerable pupils. We have an attendance crisis in our schools at present; more than 22% of children severely or persistently absent from school. My Committee has been doing some work on school attendance, and we know that persistent and severe absence is a complex problem with a number of contributory factors, including poverty, an increased level of social, emotional and mental health need following the covid-19 pandemic, and the crisis in the SEND system.

School leaders tell us that the pandemic broke the social contract between schools and parents, and that it has often been difficult to repair it. Introducing an entitlement to authorised absence would send entirely the wrong message to families at a time when the whole system should be pulling together to restore trust and confidence and to support children who are struggling to be in school to thrive.

For the most vulnerable children, school is a protective factor. It is where they can get a hot meal—thanks to this Government, they are able to get both a healthy and nutritious breakfast and a hot lunch—can forge positive relationships with trusted adults and can access not only education, but a wider range of enriching extracurricular activities. If we say it is fine for the children of parents who can afford a holiday to skip school for 10 days, what message are we sending about the importance of being in school to the families who may never have the opportunity to go on holiday, but who often encounter significant obstacles in getting their children to school, for a wide range of reasons?

The current challenges of severe and persistent absence demand multiple solutions. Schools must continue to rebuild relationships of trust with parents. The Government’s reforms to SEND and to the curriculum and assessment framework must ensure that school is an exciting, inspiring and engaging place for all children and young people. The child poverty strategy must remove the barriers to school attendance for the poorest pupils.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

I agree wholeheartedly with the hon. Member’s argument, but does she agree that slapping on fines will make the relationship between parents and schools more adversarial, creating more problems than it tries to solve?

[Helen Hayes]

I have not mentioned fines, but I agree that fining parents is a very flawed area of policy. I do not want to say it is always entirely the wrong thing to do, but fines are not a particularly effective mechanism for discouraging parents from removing their children from school for a holiday. The cost of a fine is almost always cheaper than the additional costs of a holiday outside term time. That is why I said that the solution to the imbalance in costs across term time is not to enable and authorise that absence, but to deal with the exploitative policies of travel companies. Fines, undoubtedly, are an imperfect mechanism.

--- Later in debate ---

[Michelle Welsh (Sherwood Forest) (Lab)]

Like many constituencies across the country, Sherwood Forest sees stark evidence that educational inequalities are deeply entrenched. As someone who worked on the frontline in education, I know beyond any doubt that attendance is vital for achievement. The reality of how our education system works is that every missed school day means a gap in learning. For children already facing disadvantage, that gap can become a chasm.

When a child’s family struggles, their education is the best route out of poverty and for the future—I have seen that personally. We must do everything to support their time in the classroom. However, we also stand on the shoulders of the generations who fought for the fundamental right to a break. That is not a new concept; it is woven into our social history. Let us think of the pioneering work of Cadbury, which a century ago revolutionised the idea of the workplace, recognising that employees were entitled to leisure time and a full, well-rounded life. Alternatively, there is the proud tradition of “Nottingham by the sea”. For decades, factories and pits across Nottinghamshire would shut down simultaneously for wakes week. Families would flock to Skegness—a collective, essential journey for rest and recuperation. That was not a luxury; it was a societal commitment to the wellbeing of hard-working working-class people and their families.

The rights to a break, to a breath of fresh air and to simply spend time together as a family have long been recognised as an essential component of a healthy, productive society, so how did it become acceptable that companies raise their prices as they have?

Whether for a nostalgic caravan holiday in Skegness or Great Yarmouth, which many of us enjoyed as kids, or a much-needed trip to Spain, why are travel and holiday companies permitted to quadruple their prices the moment the school bell rings? That is not simple economics, but exploitation. It is an outrage and a stain on our society. Hard-working parents who keep our local economy moving are deliberately priced out of a basic, restorative family holiday.

[Shockat Adam]

In the absence of being able to change the minds of our tour operators, does the hon. Member agree that we may need to look at the whole timetable of our syllabuses and school terms? They date back to Victorian times 150 or 160 years ago. Perhaps we should have a five-term academic year and more frequent two-week breaks.

[Michelle Welsh]

I absolutely agree, especially as someone who has a five-year old and was trying to balance this during the recess.

Who pays the highest price for this? The children of the families who are already struggling. Those children often live in cramped housing, rely on school for hot meals and desperately need the stimulation, new experiences and simple joy of a family holiday. They are denied the chance to build memories and see the world beyond their postcode, which is vital. I have taken some of the most vulnerable children in the east midlands away on adventure holidays—they have an enormous impact on their education and wellbeing. We cannot stand by while a family’s well-deserved rest is treated as a penalty to be charged. A break for a family is not a privilege to be rationed; it is a right that must be protected.

Oral Answers to Questions

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Monday 20th October 2025 Commons Chamber

[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?

[Georgia Gould]

I, too, have heard from too many parents who have had to give up their jobs or fall behind on their health, as the hon. Member has set out, because they are having to fight in a very adversarial system. We are determined to reform the system so that support is available at the earliest opportunity for young people, so that parents can collaborate with schools and are supported, and we are rebuilding the support around families.

Oral Answers to Questions

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Monday 21st July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

Ensuring that schools and colleges have the resources and buildings they need is a key part of our mission to break down barriers to opportunity. I will be very happy to meet my hon. Friend to discuss these issues further.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

Sadly, both universities in my constituency, De Montfort University and Leicester University, are on the verge of making hundreds of redundancies and even shutting down complete faculties. What financial commitment is the Department making to secure academic jobs, especially in subjects such as chemistry, humanities and languages, rather than making short-term cuts?

[Bridget Phillipson]

The hon. Gentleman will appreciate that universities are independent institutions that are able to make their own decisions around financial management. As a Government, we have sought to stabilise the higher education sector. That is why we took the difficult but necessary decision to increase tuition fees. Later this year, we will be publishing a post-16 strategy that will deal with many of his questions.

Giving Every Child the Best Start in Life

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Wednesday 16th July 2025 Commons Chamber

[Helen Hayes]

I agree with the hon. Gentleman. Over my 10 years in this place, I have seen how it has become harder and harder for families to get resources and accountability out of the Child Maintenance Service. I agree that there is further work to do in that space, and I am sure the Government are similarly aware of the challenges.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

I thank the hon. Member for giving way, especially as she is making such a powerful speech. Yesterday, I went to an event with Health Equals, which has shown that where a child is born can lead to a 16-year discrepancy in life expectancy due to poverty. Does she agree that some form of legally binding poverty reduction target scheme could be put in place, as in Scotland, so that we can measure our progress?

[Helen Hayes]

I thank the hon. Member for his intervention, and it is devastating to hear about those disparities across the country. Recently, I was at a secondary school in a very deprived area of my constituency, and a teacher told me that she noticed at an event for those from across the whole of her academy trust that her children were smaller than children who went to schools in more affluent areas of the country. That is an intolerable disgrace.

We expect the Government’s child poverty strategy to be ambitious and far reaching, and if it is to do so, it must have clear targets and there must be clear accountability in the strategy. I look forward to its publication, and my Committee, along with the Work and Pensions Committee, will play our part in scrutinising that important piece of work.

I am heartened to see this Government putting children and young people at the heart of their priorities after 14 years during which they were an afterthought. There is much more to do, and my Committee will continue to play our part by scrutinising the Government and making evidence-based recommendations. I want to see a clear vision for children and young people with real ambition for every child, and a plan for all parts of our education and care system, so that we can start to see the promise, in this Government’s agenda, of transformed lives and life chances being delivered in every part of our country.

Outdoor Education

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Wednesday 11th June 2025 Westminster Hall

[Several hon. Members rose—]

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

Does the hon. Member agree that, as one in eight children living in urban areas does not have a garden, we should encourage some sort of exchange programme between rural and urban schools so that they can also enjoy the outdoors and benefit from it?

[Tim Farron]

That is a great suggestion. I will happily take the other intervention.

--- Later in debate ---

[Tim Farron]

I absolutely will. My hon. Friend makes an incredibly important point about integrating outdoor education in the curriculum as a whole.

To turn the situation around will take a serious, conscious and deliberate effort, and I want the Government to take this opportunity to make that happen. This absolutely has to be a cross-party mission. By the way, this is a small half-hour debate, and yet there are more people here than in many hour and a half debates, which shows how important this is to many people. There are no Conservatives here, but I want to pay tribute to two of them: Sam Rowlands, a Member of the Senedd in Wales, and Liz Smith in the Scottish Parliament, who have so ably led campaigns to increase access to outdoor learning. It is a joy to work with and learn from them.

I met the Minister’s colleague, the Under-Secretary of State for Education, the hon. Member for Portsmouth South (Stephen Morgan), recently, and was impressed by his engagement and interest in the issue. I raised with him a point that I want to raise with the Minister here today; I also have a specific request to make—a few of them, actually. Here we go.

First, will the Minister conduct a review of access to outdoor education experiences in our schools? Specifically, will the Department for Education conduct a review of which children and schools are accessing outdoor education opportunities and which children and schools are not accessing those opportunities? Will she ensure that the review analyses why those who are not getting outdoor education experiences are missing out? Then, having identified those barriers, will she come to Parliament with a plan for systematically tackling them? Will she review the capacity in the sector to ascertain our ability to provide access in reality for every young person?

My second ask is for a nature premium, modelled on the existing PE and sport premium, for the 18% in the poorest of our communities who never even visit the natural environment. Children whose imagination is captured by the outdoors in early life through outdoor education are much more likely to make their own choices in an environmentally beneficial way through the rest of their life. Will the Minister look at the evidence from the trial in Glasgow, which is supported by a private donor, and commit to rolling out the nature premium across the country?

My third ask is basically three asks in one. There are three reviews happening right now that should have outdoor learning at their heart and could transform opportunities for young people if the Government choose to seize the moment. First, DEFRA’s access to nature scheme is under review. It provides residentials for young people at schools where more than 30% of children have pupil premium funding. Is the Minister involved in that review, and is she pushing for that scheme to be maintained and extended?

Secondly, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport is leading on the Government’s youth strategy. I understand that the interim report is due out this month. Is the Minister involved in the review, and has the Department for Education pushed for outdoor education to be central and integral to the youth strategy’s mission to radically improve outcomes for our young people?

Thirdly, on the Department for Education’s own curriculum review, will the Minister say something about her work to ensure that outdoor learning, including the importance of residentials, becomes central to the curriculum at both primary and secondary level? At the moment, I have to say, the signs are not encouraging: in the draft curriculum review, the word “outdoor” appears just once. How can the Minister reassure us that the final review will not completely miss this golden opportunity?

My final and fourth ask is an ambitious one, but surely this is the time to be ambitious for our young people. If the Government want to do something utterly transformational that will improve education and mental health outcomes, tackle obesity and physical poor health, and increase life chances and cohesion in our society, they should support my presentation Bill, which calls for every child to have an entitlement to a week-long residential outdoor education experience at primary, and then again at secondary school.

Schools should be fully funded to provide those experiences. Outdoor education centres should be involved in the design of those programmes, and they should be given the ability to expand capacity. No child should miss out because their parents could not afford it. The value would be immense. It would light the blue touchpaper on a lifelong love of nature, adventure and the outdoors. It would build citizens who can cope and thrive in the modern world. It would mean happier and healthier people, better learners, better workers and a better country.

[Shockat Adam]

Will the hon. Gentleman give way?

[Tim Farron]

I had better not, because I am running out of time.

There is so much catastrophising about the state of society—so much gloom-filled misery among our politicians and commentators. There was a headline in The Daily Telegraph this week—I do not know whether you saw it, Dr Huq—that said: “Britain is heading for utter oblivion”. I mean, come on—get a grip. It is time to do something transformational and positive, not sink into this spiralling, miserabilist narrative, whining about decline and saying that the past is always better than the present, that our problems are all insurmountable and, above all, that it is always somebody else’s fault. I am not having that, and nor are my communities in Westmorland and the outdoor education sector. In the lakes, the dales and the other wild places of our wonderful country lie the biggest, best antidote to so much that is wrong. Those are the raw resources, and we should get out there and make them our own. Let us deploy those resources.

That is why I beg the Minister: agree to our requests for a departmental review of the barriers to outdoor education, roll out the nature premium across our country, expand the access to nature scheme, reassure us that outdoor education will be at the heart of the curriculum review and the youth strategy, and make outdoor education experiences an entitlement for every single child. If that sounds like a lot to ask—several problems to solve, an overwhelming challenge, almost like a mountain to climb—I know some people who have the skills to help her. The outdoor education sector, the Institute for Outdoor Learning, the Association of Heads of Outdoor Education Centres and the all-party group are eager to be part of her team as she acts as the Government’s internal advocate and champion for outdoor education.

[The Minister for School Standards (Catherine McKinnell)]

It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Dr Huq. I was so gripped by speech made by the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale (Tim Farron) that I forgot to get any water; I will pour some while I am starting, in case I get a frog in my throat.

I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on securing this important debate and the incredible passion with which he presents these issues. It is, rightly and understandably, not the first time he has raised them with me. I admire his passion, particularly because he represents a part of the world that has an absolute abundance of outdoor riches and opportunities. For him to advocate so strongly for children who do not necessarily have those opportunities on their doorstep is truly admirable, and I respect the arguments he is making in that regard.

I also agree that children and young people need to have that rich experience. As the Minister for School Standards, I know there are many demands on the curriculum and a lot of interest in the curriculum and assessment review, in the hope that it will deliver a broad and rich curriculum, enrichment and opportunities for all young people. Fundamentally, as a Government, we are determined in our mission to break down barriers to opportunity; we know that, as children grow and develop, giving them opportunities and a rich and broad curriculum is not only right, but what drives high and rising standards. The two things are not unrelated.

I do not have time to pay tribute to all the other contributions, but there is clearly a lot of passion in the Chamber about this subject. The hon. Gentleman set out very well the arguments for why we need to enable children and young people to have experiences that will help them develop resilience and build skills for life, so that they can handle life’s ups and downs. For many people, spending time outdoors is how they take care of their mental and physical health.

The hon. Gentleman will be reassured to know that a growing body of evidence links access to nature to a range of positive health outcomes for young people; it helps them to develop a deeper understanding not only of our planet and the world in which we live, but their place within it. There is nothing more humbling than the sight of an enormous mountain or a huge lake, and I agree with him on the importance of being able to have those experiences.

We need an evidence base before we implement or mandate any changes in our school system. I need to discuss that so that I can come on to the hon. Gentleman’s asks at the end of my speech. To build on the evidence that we already have, we are supporting research by the University of Oxford, which is looking at how the mental health and wellbeing of young people can be improved through nature-based programmes that would be delivered by schools. Outputs from this research will be published with the Department for Education and shared during summer this year. That further research will help us to understand the specific benefits of spending time in nature and ascertain which nature-based activities provide the strongest impacts and outcomes for young people.

However, as the hon. Gentleman also passionately set out, access to the benefits provided by nature is unevenly distributed among children and young people, with the most disadvantaged being the least likely to reap the rewards. Children in deprived areas have less access to green space and spend less time in it than those in the most affluent areas. Deprived inner city areas have only a fifth of the amount of good quality green space as the most affluent and children in the most deprived areas spend 20% less time outside. That inequity impacts health, wellbeing, development and career choices. It puts barriers in place for people that can last throughout their lifetime. As a Government, we are determined to break those down.

In April 2022, the Department for Education published “Sustainability and climate change: a strategy for the education and children’s services systems”. Through that, we have emphasised the importance of young people growing up with an appreciation of nature and a strong understanding of climate change and its causes, and of ensuring that they have the skills to help to create a sustainable future for us all. We believe that education settings have to play their part in shaping a sustainable future and helping young people develop responsible behaviours and a sense of responsibility for the world in which we live.

I appreciate that it is not quite the same as being in the beautiful Lake district, but the National Education Nature Park is delivered in partnership with the Natural History Museum and the Royal Horticultural Society, and it is helping to deliver on the vision by bringing together all the land from across education settings into a vast virtual nature park. It inspires children and young people to get involved in taking practical action to improve the biodiversity of their school grounds, while developing a greater connection to nature and learning about its role in climate change. Through the National Education Nature Park, children and young people can participate in outdoor education at low or no cost and within the boundaries of their own education setting.

[Shockat Adam]

Will there be consideration for children with sensitivity issues and special educational needs in that programme?

[Catherine McKinnell]

Yes. The particular Nature Education Park is for schools to use and adapt as required. I appreciate the concern that the hon. Gentleman raises. Ensuring that all children have access to an excellent education is a priority for this Government, and that includes children with special educational needs and disabilities.

One of the things I want to focus on is our absolute determination that all children have access to a wide range of enrichment activities. That is an important part of our mission as a Government to break down barriers to opportunity. That might mean Duke of Edinburgh’s award participation, accessing outdoor education through the combined cadet force, accessing local youth services or building trips into outdoor education settings. The Department has committed to publishing an enrichment framework. That will be non-statutory, but there will be very clear guidance for schools on developing their enrichment offer. For some schools, that will include a variety of outdoor education opportunities.

I want to be clear about mandatory class time in a natural setting. The Department does not—and cannot, under the Education Act 2002—prescribe how class time should be used to deliver the national curriculum subject content and certainly cannot prescribe activities outside school time. Setting a minimum expectation for access to nature would remove the school’s discretion over the additional content of its curricula, which they are enabled to tailor to their local environment and to choose what to do within their extracurricular activities and timetable. The hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale knows that many schools choose to do that.

Pupil premium funding is regularly used by schools to ensure equal access to those opportunities and that cost is not a barrier for some families to participate. I was chatting to people at a school just last week about that very thing—making sure that all the activities made available to all students are fully funded by the school. More generally, we are focusing on the quality of teacher training because, as the hon. Gentleman mentioned, some teachers do not feel confident. We are investing in teacher training because teachers know how to get the best for their students and need support and training to offer the best opportunities for the students in their area if they deem that taking classes outside will aid their learning. Geography is a good example of where taking students on outdoor activities will certainly enhance learning, but there are many examples in other subjects as well.

I am afraid that I have no time left to respond to the other, specific concerns that the hon. Gentleman raised, but I am more than happy to respond further in writing. I did not want to take away his opportunity to come back with a final comment, if that is the order of the day.

Free School Meals

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Thursday 5th June 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

If we are to get the benefits right on free school meals, we must ensure that the quality of the food is nutritious for all children. As I mentioned in my statement, this is good for attendance, good for behaviour and good for life chances. I hope my hon. Friend will contribute to the work that we will do in revising the school food standards.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

Sadly, a local survey recently found that close to 20% of children in Leicester are worried about not having enough to eat. But, paradoxically, a quarter of the population of 10 to 11-year-olds in my city are clinically obese, and close to 40% have visual signs of dental decay. I warmly welcome this announcement, but why are the Government waiting till September 2026 to make these changes? Will the Minister reassure us that this policy will be properly funded so that schools can provide nutritious and balanced meals, and not just ultra-processed food like turkey twizzlers, which have been shown, among many other things, to reduce life expectancy?

[Stephen Morgan]

I can assure the hon. Member that this scheme will be fully funded. More broadly, I have set out plans for the child poverty strategy to be published later this year. The key to a mission-driven Government is to make sure that Government Departments are working together to improve life chances for children. I am delighted that we are working closely with colleagues from the Department of Health and Social Care to make that happen.

School Teachers’ Review Body: Recommendations

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Thursday 22nd May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Catherine McKinnell]

Pay negotiations for support staff are done through the National Joint Council for Local Government Services. We recognise the challenge that the hon. Member identified, and the strong role that support staff play in our schools. We have legislated for the school support staff negotiating body, which the last Government abolished, to be re-established, to ensure that they have a strong voice in these conversations.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

May I raise concerns about our further education college teachers? There is a real shortage of skilled workers in this country, and one of the reasons for that is that we have undervalued and under-invested in our FE college teachers, who are paid £9,000 less than their peers. No wonder 50% of them leave within the first three years of employment. Does the Minister recognise the vital role of FE college teachers in our education system? Will they be in the Government’s plans for a fairer and better future for everybody?

[Catherine McKinnell]

We absolutely recognise, respect and value the vital role of all those who work with 16 to 19-year-olds and people of all ages, whether in a school, college or FE setting; they provide that springboard to launch people into their future careers. We will continue to recognise and support the sector.

Adoption Breakdown

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Thursday 3rd April 2025 Commons Chamber

[Tom Gordon]

I have had the pleasure of meeting the hon. Gentleman’s child and look forward to meeting more in due course. He makes an excellent point. I will come on to everything he said when I set out the wish list from adoptive parents to the Minister, and I am sure she will respond to the best of her ability, within the constraints of what the Government can do.

When Ian and Verity reached out to me, I was shocked by how the local authority and local services had failed them. When they reached crisis point, they requested an intervention from the local authority, but instead of receiving help, they were threatened with police action for child abandonment. Ultimately, they were forced to disrupt the adoption, causing trauma to both the child and the entire family. I have asked people to email me their stories, and a common, repeated theme is local authorities using child abandonment charges as a scare tactic, which is deeply worrying. The advocacy group PATCH has highlighted how families facing adoption crises are often met with punitive approaches that fail to acknowledge the impact of trauma on these children. As a result, families break down because they cannot access the resources needed to address those challenges. I have heard from many families that have experienced breakdowns, and instead of receiving support when they have faced violent and threatening behaviour from their children, they have been met with blame, threats and criticism. A culture of blaming adoptive parents persists, leaving them isolated and without the help they need. Many adoptive parents are not fully informed about the child’s needs before adoption.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

I thank the hon. Member for securing this very important debate. Does he agree that, under article 20 of the United Nations convention on the rights of the child, when children cannot be looked after by their own family, they should be looked after by those who respect or represent their ethnicity, their culture, their religion and their language? With BAME children being disproportionately represented—and, unfortunately, very vulnerable—does he agree that this is about not just finding a place for children but finding the right place for them?

[Tom Gordon]

I thank the hon. Member for that intervention. He makes a good point. We have ended up in a situation where local authorities are trying to recruit anyone to adopt, and it is often a scramble to find any place, so places do not necessarily always meet the needs of or provide the best option for those children. I think that is the nature of the situation we find ourselves in, with the service at a crisis point.

Many families that have been in touch have also said that support for adoptive families is often limited to the adoption and special guardianship support fund. This fund seems to have become a bit of a sticking plaster to allow local authorities to claim that they are supporting families with adopted children. While the fund is massively helpful, it is often the only resource that people can turn to.

As the Minister mentioned a number of times during Tuesday’s urgent question, local authorities have a legal obligation to support families who have adopted. However, this fund is often inadequate, and it is the extent of support in many areas. It is not an instant fix, and it is often only available to families once they have reached crisis point. As the hon. Member for York Central (Rachael Maskell) said, families often report waiting for months—six months and upwards—to access funds and support due to delays by local authorities. During this waiting period, crises can escalate, and families are pushed closer and closer to breakdown.

Oral Answers to Questions

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Monday 10th March 2025 Commons Chamber

[Stephen Morgan]

There is no challenge more crucial for this Government than tackling child poverty. The taskforce has started the urgent work of publishing the strategy, which will look at levers across four key themes: increasing incomes, reducing essential costs, increasing financial resilience, and better local support, especially in early years.

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

Parents whose children have special educational needs and disabilities do not wish to send their children to far-away schools, but they have to, because of a lack of local provision. If the children are over the age of 16, however, it is at the discretion of the local authority to decide whether to meet the cost of transporting them to school, even though education is effectively compulsory until the age of 18. Many local authorities, including in Leicester South, are now passing that cost entirely on to parents. Will the Minister commit to dealing with SEND transport costs in the Department’s work to reduce the cost of sending children to school?

[Stephen Morgan]

I will happily meet the hon. Member to discuss those issues further.

SEND Education Support

Shockat Adam Excerpts

Tuesday 25th February 2025 Westminster Hall

[Shockat Adam (Leicester South) (Ind)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Twigg. I congratulate the hon. Member for Suffolk Coastal (Jenny Riddell-Carpenter) on securing this vital debate. I refer Members to my entry in the Register of Members’ Financial Interests: I am an NHS optometrist. I rise to highlight two critical issues: the severe gap in transport provision for post-16 students, and the additional challenges faced by children with visual impairment in the SEND system.

No parent of a SEND child willingly chooses to send them miles away for education. They do so because there is a lack of local provision. Until the age of 16, local authorities cover the cost of transportation, but beyond that, families are expected to finance it themselves —an expectation that is, frankly, unrealistic. I have spoken to parents who are on the brink of crisis, including Ruth and Esther from Still SEND 16+. Some are considering giving up their work to personally manage their child’s school commute, pushing them into benefits and ultimately costing the state more than simply providing transport would. A consultation has already shown that 29% of affected young people may be forced to abandon education. Will the Government consider making post-16 SEND transport statutory, ensuring that young people do not have to choose between education and affordability?

I also wish to raise the additional challenge faced by children with a visual impairment within the SEND framework. Across the UK, 41,000 children and young people rely on specialist visual impairment education services. Half of them have additional SEND needs, yet local disparities in provision mean that many do not receive the support they require. The Royal National Institute of Blind People has called for urgent reforms. I echo that. The curriculum framework for children and young people with visual impairment must be embedded in all SEND policies. The Government commitment to recruit 6,500 expert teachers must include funding for additional registered qualified habitation specialists and qualified visual impairment specialist teachers, and all teacher training and special educational needs co-ordinator courses must include mandatory visual impairment awareness training to improve inclusivity in mainstream schools.