What Britain's parties say and do in public, recorded from the source.
Every entry links to Hansard, Parliament, the Electoral Commission or the party's own channel. Every party is tracked by the same rules. Methodology
Labour Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Conservative and Unionist Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Liberal Democrats
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Reform UK
Latest entry 6 Nov 2026
Scottish National Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Green Party
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Plaid Cymru
Latest entry 4 Nov 2026
Showing every spoken contribution, including 12,832 under 12 words. Hide short remarks
Today’s announcement from Jaguar Land Rover is devastating for its workforce, for the automotive industry and for the wider supply chain. A manufacturing supplier to JLR in my constituency has lost more than 150 jobs. What access to finance will the Government provide to help west midlands firms diversify, enter new markets and protect skilled jobs?
I beg to move, That this House has considered Government support for the UK Youth Parliament. It is an honour to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. I warmly welcome the Minister to her place for what I believe is her first Westminster Hall debate. Many colleagues have taken their seat in this place after years of serving their community as a local councillor or in a political role, but before my election I was a teacher and an academic. Standing for Parliament was almost the first time that I had run for anything; in fact, my only prior experience was running to be a Member of the Youth Parliament when I was about 14. I am sorry to say that I came third, although the confidence that I gained from putting myself forward stayed with me and, I have no doubt, helped me to reach this place.
I thank the hon. Gentleman for making that point, to which I will return at the end of my speech. As we look to deliver better youth services and participation for all our young people, we certainly need to think about how to fund it properly. The UK Youth Parliament is an institution in which we can take great pride. It develops skills, provides opportunities to young people right across the country and helps them to have a voice in our democracy. I have had the privilege of meeting Erin and Kingsley, the last two MYPs for Bracknell. I believe that Kingsley has joined us in the Gallery today, alongside other MYPs; we briefly lost them to the right hon. Member for Richmond and Northallerton (Rishi Sunak), but I am glad to see that he has let them go so they can join us for this debate. I have heard at first hand from MYPs in Bracknell and across the country about the benefits of the scheme for them personally, as well as for the young people they represent. I should declare an interest as the chair of the all-party parliamentary group for schools, learning and assessment. Just before the summer, the APPG concluded its inquiry into votes at 16 with a report that I encourage all Members, especially the Minister, to read. The inquiry’s aim was to explore and make recommendations on how the Government can prepare young people to feel educated and empowered to use their vote at the age of 16. We heard from a wide range of young people, education professionals and youth and civil society organisations on how votes at 16 can be not just implemented, but made a success. Contributors to the report highlighted the importance of engagement with democracy and the democratic process, not just in the classroom but through wider enrichment opportunities. The UK Youth Parliament is a perfect example. Votes at 16 has been a long-standing campaign of the UK Youth Parliament. Its imminent introduction is a direct example of the power of the UK Youth Parliament to give young people a platform to make change at the highest levels. I firmly believe that the Government would not be making this historic change were it not for the campaigning zeal of successive generations of MYPs. I pay tribute to them all.
Absolutely, and that is a theme to which I will return. Investing in young people is so important, not only for empowering them but for the skills and experience we need in the economy, so that young people can go on to get good jobs and support their local communities. That is exactly why I have always championed everything we can do to empower young people at the earliest age.
I quite agree. Many young people have used their time as MYPs to make a real difference, including Sienna, a former MYP for Wolverhampton whose campaign against knife crime delivered bleed control kits across the west midlands, and Caitlin, a former MYP for Durham who worked on setting up the Big Debate in her local area. I am proud that I will be working with Kingsley, the MYP for Bracknell Forest, on his priorities for our community, including young people’s mental health and local transport.
What a lovely thing to have on the record. Sienna sounds like an incredible young woman. MYPs, like MPs, are elected to represent their local area. They engage in debate at a local, regional and national level on a huge range of issues. In 2009, the Youth Parliament became the first body ever, aside from Members of Parliament, to use the Commons Chamber.
I quite agree. That is a theme to which I will return. I think that there are sometimes some miscomprehensions about how diverse the YP scheme really is, but as the Government look to its future, we should absolutely be talking about making it even better and more inclusive; that is all to the good. In the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport’s own words: “The UK Youth Parliament is DCMS’ key mechanism for engaging with young people and ensuring their voices are heard in policy and decision making.” If we are serious about protecting and nurturing our democracy, we must also protect and nurture the opportunities that we give our young people to properly engage with it, understand it and feel a part of it.
I completely agree. Sadly, I have not yet secured Pride in Place funding for Bracknell Forest, but I encourage all right hon. and hon. Members to think about including their local MYPs and other youth representatives as part of that programme. It can only be for the better. With the welcome enfranchisement of 16 and 17-year-olds, all this has never been more crucial. The UK Youth Parliament has a vital role to play in seizing the opportunity presented by votes at 16 to make the next generation the most informed and engaged ever.
Absolutely. I passionately believe, as do the Government, that it would be very wrong to form policies that will directly shape young people’s lives without actually engaging with young people. We might not always agree with their conclusions—on the social media ban, many of the young people I spoke to in Bracknell Forest came to a different conclusion from mine—but I hope they feel that I have listened to their concerns. Their views have very much shaped my thinking on that issue and many others. In 2023, DCMS commissioned IFF Research to evaluate the UK Youth Parliament. The evaluation found that the programme is delivering on its intended goals: to engage young people across the country in the democratic process and give them a route to express their voices on the issues that matter most to them. MYPs reported improved confidence, resilience, communication, problem solving, teamwork and critical thinking skills, to name but a few—the very skills that employers are crying out for from young people, and the very skills that the Government have committed to placing at the heart of our education system. I emphasise that MYPs consistently reported that meeting and making connections with other young people from across the country was a highlight of the programme. I share the concern raised by parents and teachers across the country that an increasingly online world is an increasingly atomised, isolated one for young people. Programmes such as the UK Youth Parliament, which inspire and excite young people and give them the opportunity to connect and learn from their peers away from the online world, are crucial. The Government’s national youth strategy was the first in two decades. It sets out our commitment to building a country that works not just for but with young people. The UK Youth Parliament has a clear role to play in helping the Department to achieve the strategy, especially its key aim that our society must be one in which young people are meaningfully seen and heard.
I welcome the point. I will do my hon. Friend one better: I think that that should be the job of every single Minister. The Government’s role is to deliver for people up and down this country, and we have a particular duty to deliver for our young people. Sometimes it is their voices that are the most forgotten. I recognise that the UK Youth Parliament scheme always has room for improvement. It is certainly disappointing that not every area is represented in the Youth Parliament and that not all local areas engage evenly with the scheme. To coin a phrase, I want to see youth opportunity and youth engagement in every postcode. I have also heard concerns that it is not diverse enough and that it engages only those most likely to participate already. In fact, on that measure the Youth Parliament is far outperforming this Parliament, its older sibling. It is a far more representative body than we are. About 52% of the previous UKYP intake were women, compared with 41% of MPs; 40% had an ethnic minority background, compared with 14% of us; and 9% came from the most disadvantaged 10% of areas, according to the index of multiple deprivation, with roughly 51% coming from postcodes ranked in the most deprived half of IMD deciles. There is always more work to be done, but we would do well to take note of the UK Youth Parliament’s success in electing a rich and diverse group of representatives. I also think it is important to stress that although the programme’s most visible success might be the annual debate in the House, where young people stand up and debate so eloquently, there are many local successes that we should remember as well. We have already spoken about many of those here today. All those successes, both locally and nationally, come at a cost, but in departmental terms—certainly in Government terms—they are extremely small and extremely good value. The last full two-year funding commitment given by DCMS came to only £750,000. I hope colleagues will appreciate that I have tried to avoid too many clichés about young people. From a man of my age they are, in the words of young people, “cringe”. But I do want to indulge a little bit now with some final thoughts, not from myself but from Kingsley, our current MYP for Bracknell Forest. He put it so much better than I ever could hope to, saying that “investing in UKYP is investing in young people, our communities and the future of our democracy”.
I am grateful to the Minister for giving way—he has been very generous. May I pursue the point about enabling more people to travel to airports on public transport? I have raised with him my fear that the draft Heathrow expansion national policy statement is not strong enough to ensure that, if we are to have a third runway at Heathrow, we will also have improved rail links, including a southern rail link, which could well benefit my constituents. May I urge him, as the Government look at the responses to that consultation, to think again and strengthen the policy to ensure that we get not only the third runway, but the infrastructure that would be needed to support it?
T1. If she will make a statement on her departmental responsibilities.
Conversion practices are a form of abuse, and this Government were elected on a manifesto commitment to ban them. While I welcome the publication of the draft Bill in June and the commitment by the Minister, my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield and Rothwell (Simon Lightwood), that there will be a Committee by the end of January, can the Secretary of State appreciate the frustration of many that the process of banning this abuse is taking so long?
I was particularly disappointed by this announcement on Saturday. Over the last two years, we have worked hard in Birmingham Erdington to protect jobs at Jaguar Land Rover’s Castle Bromwich site. Given the announcement of 4,000 job losses across JLR, my constituents are deeply concerned about what that means for their livelihoods following thousands of job losses in previous rounds of reorganisation. Will the Minister assure me today about the future of the Castle Bromwich site? If JLR plans future job losses, what steps are the Government taking with it to work with others to protect jobs not just now, but in the future? We want to ensure that there are no future job losses.
I thank the Secretary of State for her statement and welcome her to her role. She is such a powerful advocate and leader when it comes to our students and brilliant teachers in Burnley, Padiham and Brierfield. Does she agree that we should not be complacent with the PISA results and that we should robustly act to address England’s weaknesses, particularly in reading and maths, and the fact that too many children do not see school as valuable?
I understand what my right hon. Friend and other colleagues across the House are saying about the need for independent oversight, particularly on the aviation side, but on the consumer side, does he agree that when the CAA works, it really does work, as in the case of the constituent of the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade)? Therefore, does he agree that is absolutely right for the Government to bring forward those powers for consumer protection?
I declare an interest as the newly elected chair of the all-party group on aviation. I welcome the steps taken by our Labour Government today to improve accessibility and protections for disabled airline passengers, to bolster consumer protections, and to simplify the legislative framework, and in doing so to boost our economy and the aviation sector more broadly. We have heard a lot today about the potential benefits of that. There are benefits as much as there are increased obligations for carriers, but I would be keen to hear more from the Minister in his winding up about some of the benefits that we can unlock on the airport and infrastructure side as well, because we have heard today from colleagues representing other small regional airports about the compliance costs associated with that. I would be interested to hear from Ministers how this Bill could address that, and what other support the Department could put in place to help small regional airports, such as Cornwall Airport Newquay in my constituency and a neighbouring constituency. We know in the case of Cornwall Airport Newquay that the Cornwall Council approach has chopped and changed. As Ministers have heard before, that is deeply unhelpful, but only by improving the passenger experience, as this Bill doubtless does, will we be able to encourage improved passenger footfall and boost revenues to support the sustainability of airports such as Cornwall Airport Newquay. I thank the Minister for the steps that Cornish MPs have already heard about in relation to the public service obligation. I appreciate that Ministers have left the door open to Cornwall council to continue or restart those conversations, should it be able to bring eligible bids forward in the future. That is really important, because as much as we can all work to promote commercial conversations with various airlines—and new routes have been introduced on the back of that—it is only through support for regional airports and by improving the passenger experience, as I know this Bill will do, will we boost the use of those airports. We have also heard of the importance of transport connectivity—integrated transport. I know that this Government’s devolution programme and the extension of bus franchising, such as the work we are doing with Cornwall council, should prove fertile ground for improving links where councils choose to take up those powers and use them constructively. I use this opportunity, perhaps shamelessly so, to be an advocate for regional airports and the connectivity they provide to basket-case situations, as we see in Cornwall’s current transport links. I call on the Minister to go beyond these great steps that he is taking today to support regional airports such as mine in Newquay.
Order. Six Members have indicated that they want to speak, so that means they have about seven minutes each. I would normally advise Members to bob if they want to speak in the debate, but two Members have indicated that they have challenging circumstances, so I will exempt them from that requirement on this occasion.
Each Front Bencher has 10 minutes, or a little longer depending on the timing.
As no Back Benchers wish to speak, I will move straight to the Lib Dem spokesperson.
I commend the Government on bringing forward this Bill. My hon. Friend is giving an excellent speech. I have been reflecting on what she has said, and on the Government’s focus on taking away barriers to consumers—our constituents—asserting their rights, especially given the cost of living challenges we face. Does she agree that there may be a lesson for the Secretary of State from the automated delay repay system that we have for rail? If there are delays of a certain length, there is an automated system of compensation for passengers. Like the hon. Member for Mid Dorset and North Poole (Vikki Slade), I have been reflecting on my experience. My husband and I travelled with Iberia, and are to this day owed hundreds and hundreds of pounds, which was not automatically transferred to us; we had to put a long time into making compensation claims. Why are these rights, which extend to all our constituents, not automatically fulfilled by the airline companies? Does my hon. Friend agree that the Secretary of State could reflect on that when she is drafting the secondary legislation?
My hon. Friend is making an extremely important speech about young people’s participation in politics. I recently got to meet Freddie Burnett-Cherry, the MYP for Preston and South Ribble in my constituency. I was particularly impressed by how much work he has already done to better his community, such as youth surveys on antisocial behaviour and work on water safety. Does my hon. Friend agree that greater investment in the UK Youth Parliament is not just a nice thing for young people, but a brilliant investment in improving our communities right now?
The actions taken by this Government stand in stark contrast to the actions of previous Conservative Governments, who were happy to watch the closure of the Massey Ferguson factory, the Alvis tank factory and Peugeot in Coventry in the ’80s, which led to 20% unemployment in the city where I grew up. After those closures, we saw the financial services industry target workers, some of whom were in defined benefit pension schemes and considering voluntary redundancy, and persuade them to transfer to a less beneficial pension. After firms had gone bust, people realised that they had been mis-sold their pension. Will the Minister take every possible step to protect the pension prosperity of those who will face voluntary or compulsory redundancy at the global headquarters of JLR at Whitley in Coventry?
The Education Committee’s report on further education and skills, published last year, found that technical and vocational pathways were not presented with the “same prominence” as academic routes in schools and colleges. In fact, we had evidence from eight Yorkshire colleges highlighting the “extremely limited” opportunities for under-16s to pursue any creative subjects. How will the reforms correct this, and give parity of esteem to academic and technical routes?
There is concern about this news among my constituents who work at JLR Halewood and those who work in the supply chain in the whole of the north-west of England. The five-week suspension of manufacturing last year as a consequence of the cyber-attack has left a legacy of concern about the future and about financial resilience issues for some companies. What steps is the Minister taking to ensure that the full impact of this announcement on the supply chain is mitigated as much as possible and that resilience in our automotive supply chain is boosted for the future?
I beg to move, That this House has considered Pica training within SEND provision. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. Before I go any further, I want to make an admission. Until last year, I had not encountered pica, either in a personal capacity or through my work in Parliament. I had never heard of the condition. My first awareness of it was at a special educational needs and disabilities roundtable event that I organised last year, the purpose of which was to hear the experiences of parents and professionals across my Dagenham and Rainham constituency so I could feed their voices into the Government’s consultation on SEND reform. At the event, I heard a brave story from a young woman and her family living with the realities of pica. There are many moments in a MP’s life that really move them, and despite the thousands of cases that we deal with on behalf of our constituents, there are ones that truly stick with us. The brave young woman at that SEND roundtable was Suzy Read, and she is here today. I can honestly say that her story, her journey, her perpetual struggle and the fight she has had to get her daughter the care she needs and deserves hushed the room. Suzy told us about her life, where she constantly risk-assessed every room, setting and experience, and how the lack of help, combined with the failures of the system, took a toll on her mental health and the physical wellbeing of her child. We heard how the failure to provide access to a safe educational setting for her child resulted in daily anxieties, daily struggles and, because of the lack of pica recognition, understanding and training, daily explanations of why her child required bespoke care. The room was moved to tears. Something Suzy said has stuck with me ever since: “Pica is not rare. It is just rarely spoken about.” That is why I am here today, to make the case for pica training to be a statutory requirement across educational settings under SEND provision. What is pica? It is an overwhelming compulsion to eat non-food and non-nutritional items such as glass, soil, clay, lead, ice and much more. It can include items that poison, puncture organs, choke, and end a child’s life. It is important to note that while the debate will focus on training in schools and other educational settings, pica also affects adults who have lived with it from an early age or whose condition has presented late.
The hon. Gentleman is right, and I thank him for raising that matter. While this debate will focus on training in schools and other educational settings, it is important to note that there is a desperate need for pica recognition and training across the NHS, local authorities, care providers and even housing providers. However, that is not the focus today. Sadly, pica is still not fully understood, which often results in people being dismissed or the condition being treated as a behavioural issue. While there is a growing consensus that pica must be treated as the serious medical and safeguarding issue that it is, the lack of awareness means the condition is overshadowed. As such, it is not considered by policymakers. That has to change.
My hon. Friend is quite right. That is ultimately what we seek in the long term. We do not want anyone to have to go through what some families have already gone through. Only if we adopt national training will that actually stop. Earlier this year, I held a pica awareness parliamentary drop-in session with Suzy and the National Pica Advisory Service, representatives of which are in the Public Gallery. I met Tolu, Belinda and the team, who do amazing advocacy work to support parents of children with pica. Speaking to advocates and parents, the consistent theme was a lack of professional knowledge across sectors, whether at schools or—this is another important point—when people present at hospital. Parents are fed up of hearing, “The item will pass through; don’t worry about it.” At my event, the National Pica Advisory Service told the story of a parent of a child with pica. Had that parent not persisted in pushing that their child did not just have an upset tummy, one of the child’s organs would have failed and they would have died. There was a screw lodged in the child’s intestines that was discovered only when the parent demanded an X-ray. That should have been the first port of call when the parent explained that their child had pica, not something that, once again, a parent had to fight for. I heard another story of a child in a private-rented property who would lick paint. Sadly, due to the age of the property the paint had high lead content. In such circumstances, had the child continued and—again—had the parent not persisted, it would have led to the child’s death. Early diagnosis and early intervention are key, but so too is ensuring that adaptions are made, environments are made safe and that caregivers and educators are equipped with the knowledge and training to monitor those with pica. In 2023, pica came to prominence in the media due to the tragic case of Owen Garnett, a student at Welcombe Hills, a specialist SEND provision school in Stratford-upon-Avon. Owen had pica and was in an educational environment that understood that, yet after choking on a paper towel unsupervised, Owen sadly died, aged 19. The coroner’s report highlighted that “the school’s risk assessments…recorded that Owen should ‘Never be left alone when out’ and…in bold ‘NB due to Pica, a named person must watch Owen at all times’”. The report concluded that “Owen’s carer specifically raised concerns surrounding blue paper towels at a meeting…On 4 January 2023 Owen was discovered to have blue paper towel in his mouth and a message was sent to his carers saying this had occurred… On 9 January 2023, contrary to the…risk assessment, Owen was outside of the classroom and was unsupervised. When Owen was located, it was discovered that he had crammed a significant amount of blue paper towel into his mouth and throat and was choking.” He was transported to Warwick hospital. He suffered a hypoxic brain injury. A decision was taken to remove life support and, sadly, he died on 11 January. The Health and Safety Executive said that the school had failed to ensure that all risks associated with pica were identified and had failed to respond to family concerns. The multi-academy trust was fined £300,000 and told to learn from its mistakes but, let us be honest, people at the trust can move on with their lives; a family has lost a son and their lives will never be the same again. It was an exceptional case and not a common occurrence but it serves to highlight what can happen if pica is not taken seriously in an educational setting. All children deserve a safe, secure and happy educational journey, whether in mainstream education, a specialist school or other educational settings, but at present that is not being delivered for children with pica. Parents with children who have pica live their lives in a state of constant vigilance, and they need the assurance that their child is being cared for with the same vigilance at school. That is why, alongside parents in my constituency and across the country, and the National Pica Advisory Service, I believe that educators who are responsible for a child with pica must receive mandatory pica training. This will support teachers to grow their knowledge of the condition and how to support anyone who has pica. Training must be about planning for pica. Classrooms are full of potentially life-threatening dangers to children with pica. Risk assessments should take account of all harmful and hazardous substances, including staples, batteries, glassware, sharp or poisonous items and magnets. They should be replaced with safer items where possible, such as non-toxic Play-Doh, paints and crayons. It is crucial that all educators who are responsible for a child with pica must have knowledge about that individual and have read their plan. That is to help them to develop a good understanding of the child’s pica behaviours, how to keep them safe and how to redirect them. It should include completing a pica monitoring form regularly. Through this process, if an individual has particular pica items, those can be identified and removed from the space as part of an ongoing risk assessment. Finally, all educators must learn to understand the signs of choking, poisoning and possible blockages in individuals with pica, so they can seek medical assistance as soon as possible if something goes wrong. Herein lies one of my main worries about the Government’s proposal to reform SEND provision. I have heard many stories of pica oversight in specialist schools—places that have very good, well-trained professionals who should be able to risk-assess and keep children safe. However, because of the lack of specific pica training and the significant pressures in any SEND environment, there are justified parental concerns that pica is treated as an afterthought. As many local authorities are pushed to deliver SEND provision in mainstream settings, there is every possibility—given larger class sizes and more general training—that the new model will not build in specialist training on pica or other specific disorders. I will end as I started, by requesting that pica training is considered for inclusion in any SEND reform, making it a statutory requirement across educational settings and under SEND provision.
I thank the Minister and agree with her that this has been a very good cross-party discussion, with thoughtful input from everybody. I know that her door is always open and that she is always there if there is anything we need. What she has committed to today is good news for my constituents. This debate, under your chairmanship, Mr Betts, has been Parliament at its best. An issue that is very important to many constituents across the country has been debated and highlighted. The work goes on. Question put and agreed to. Resolved, That this House has considered Pica training within SEND provision.
I thank my hon. Friend for paying tribute to our incredibly brave police officers in Cleveland, who have had an extraordinarily difficult couple of weeks but have dealt with the situation with extreme professionalism. One of their challenges is that since 2010 Cleveland has 220 fewer officers—it is at the bottom of the table for police cuts—so it is extraordinary how the force has approached the situation with such professionalism, bravery and courage despite that situation. Does my hon. Friend agree that the funding formula needs to be urgently reviewed so that we are not penalising areas of high deprivation?
With permission, Madam Deputy Speaker, I will make a statement to update the House on the Government’s education and skills reforms. It is a real privilege to address Members for the first time as Education Secretary—without question, the best job in Government. I got a reminder of why this is such a special job when I went to GCSE results day in Harper Green school in Bolton. While I was with Micah as he opened his exceptional results, his mum beamed and gave him a massive hug. She then gave me one, too—she was thanking me for his success. That is the power of education: a source of pride and hope, and a sense of achievement and confidence. I was a proud mum myself on GCSE results day this year, and I know how much hard work goes in and how committed our teachers and staff are. However, results day is not like that for every child. Too many are locked out of opportunity and left behind, which is why we are leading an education revolution. We have real strengths to build on; as yesterday’s programme for international student assessment results showed, a 30-year consensus begun by the last Labour Government and continued by successive Governments, particularly focusing on literacy and numeracy, has raised standards and performance. Generations of children have benefited from world-leading practice in fundamentals such as phonics—introduced by Labour and built on by the Conservatives—and today, more pupils are getting the top grades in GCSE maths and are going on to do A-level. As someone who loves maths and did an A-level in it myself, that brings me huge joy. The whole House should celebrate and thank our fantastic teaching workforce for the latest PISA data, which shows strong international rankings in maths, reading and science. I will always keep pushing for ever higher standards, but continued improvement is about challenging ourselves about what is going wrong, not just what is going right. An honest appraisal of the evidence shows that our current system works well for some, but is leaving too many behind. The disadvantage gap remains stubbornly wide; the gap between regions is widening; the special educational needs and disabilities crisis is growing; 1.5 million children were persistently absent from school at the last general election; the number of young people educated at home has doubled since 2019; and now a million young people, all educated during the past 16 years, are not in education, employment or training. Anyone who cares about the futures of these young people can see the need for change. Alan Milburn has warned of a lost generation, labelling education “the faltering foundation”. The co-chairs of the white working class inquiry said that “Doing more of the same is unlikely to solve the problem”, and even Andreas Schleicher, who oversees PISA, said when commenting on our results that “A big share of young people think school is a waste of time. That’s not really good news”. That is the other side of the coin of a one-size-fits-all system. Nothing symbolises how we have lost perspective more than the treadmill of failure young people are on with the endless cycle of maths and English resits. Of those retaking their maths GCSE this summer, under 14% got the standard pass they needed—that is nearly nine in 10 experiencing failure again and again. Maths and English are essential, but everything we know about how to build confidence in young people tells us that this approach does not work, yet we carry on. Researchers from University College London have called it a “wellbeing penalty”. I call it wrong, which is why I am changing it. We are in the middle of a huge technological revolution, and the world is changing at a faster rate than anyone can keep up with. My children—all our children—will be doing jobs that my generation could not have conceived of. In this world of change, we have a duty to change too, but in a way that builds on, rather than abandons, what we know to be true about learning. Let us be clear: in the Al and social media age, the human ability to understand and interpret the world around us becomes more important, not less. Literacy and numeracy become more important, not less. We must equip our young people to master technology, not be mastered by it, and there is value in human endeavour that Al can never replace. While pen-and-paper exams have their place, we need to rebalance towards the applied skills of the modern world and include practical learning in practical subjects such as computing, drama and physical education, as well as ensuring that human skills such as speaking and presenting are developed. We need both knowledge and skills, not one or the other. We are talking about a broader, more inclusive education, built on strong foundations and with pathways for all. We are talking about education as a passport to work, to life and to success, regardless of people’s needs, ambitions or postcode. We are talking about supporting all children on every step of the way, from their first days of life to their first days of work and beyond. We are talking about early intervention, smoothing transitions, boosting enrichment, creating clear pathways, raising standards, keeping young people engaged, and closing the gap between classroom and workplace. We are talking about excellence for all, not just for some. This will be less an exam factory and more a talent factory. I can also confirm that we will see through the vital SEND reforms, built in partnership with parents and professionals. We are investing now in a new system of early intervention and the right support close to home so that families can get the help that they need first. We will introduce legislation and set out our response to the consultation in due course. Our commitment to opportunity does not stop there. We will make this country a technical education superpower, creating new pathways of equal esteem and equal ambition. We will connect our young people to the careers not of some dusty past, but of an exciting future. Over the summer, the Prime Minister and I announced our plans to transform technical education and work experience for young people from the age of 14, building on the revolution that is already happening post-16. Combining this with high-level academic subjects, we will develop top-quality technical qualifications that will lead to clearer pathways into T-Levels, A-Levels and the new V-Levels, as well as apprenticeships, universities and beyond. We will provide a clear line of sight into work, tailored to local opportunities, by working with mayors and local leaders. Some claim that improving technical education is somehow anti-academic, but such lazy falsehoods are stuck in the past. Technical education can also give new purpose to academic subjects, and countries that boast low levels of NEETs combine the two. Our curriculum and assessment reform will go hand in hand with that ambition, and we will soon publish proposals building on the Becky Francis review. We will have fewer barriers to progression and new emphasis on the skills that enable young people to succeed, including critical literacy, as well as more foundation and stepping-stone qualifications. More space will be available, including room for creative subjects, PE, and the development of deeper understanding. However, this will not be a system of separation. Instead, there will be choices, options, chances, and a curriculum that will be broad enough for long enough to capture the imagination of every child. That means changing the way in which schools are measured to incentivise a broader offer and reward inclusion—a system underpinned, now and always, by progress in English, maths and science. I will set out those proposals in due course. I know that many worry about change, although they agree that change is needed. Let me reassure education leaders, teachers and the workforce that they will be part of this process on every step of the way. Perhaps even more important than these new reforms is a new way of working. We will design change in partnership with the people who deliver it—change based on the very best evidence and practice, not reform beamed into the classroom directly from Whitehall. Mayoral and strategic authorities, for example, will help to deliver real work experience opportunities. For the first time, mayors will have control of the 16-19 education budget, and I know that, in respect of early years and early intervention, we can transform outcomes through the power of place. This is just the beginning. Big reform is on the way. We are moving quickly because this cannot wait. The eyes of those young people locked out of opportunity who do not see education working for them are on us, and it is our duty to show them that we get it. Some have called this “bringing back stupid”. Not a bit of it; as the Prime Minister said last week, we are bringing back hope. I commend this statement to the House.
I look forward to having many of these exchanges across the Dispatch Box. I would have hoped, though, that the right hon. Lady might have been a little more generous in building on the sense that there has been consensus on these issues for over 30 years. That began with a Labour Prime Minister talking about “education, education, education”, introducing the literacy hour and numeracy hour, introducing phonics, bringing in Sure Start for early intervention, and developing an evidence-based cycle of continued improvement. It was built on by the right hon. Lady’s Government—there is no question about that. There used to be consensus on technical education as well. Her Government should be proud of introducing T-levels, which are now coming on stream. They also introduced university technical colleges, which offered a completely separate pathway, in separate institutions, for young people at 14. She might want to look at her own record before she starts having a go. I am absolutely clear that this is not about creating a two-tier system; it is about creating multiple pathways, which, for some, might lead to the same destination. Some will take different pathways to a career in engineering; some might do A-levels and go to university, whereas others might go down a different route and arrive at the same destination. We have to address the underlying problems with our system and its outcomes; we cannot just take credit for all the good without taking responsibility for what has not worked. A few people whom the right hon. Lady once lauded agree with us on this issue. Sir Hamid Patel has said: “our education system is not working for every child.” The Education Endowment Foundation has said that “inequality of outcomes…has blighted our education system for far too long.” Lord Agnew—I remember him—the well-known Conservative Education Minister, has said that our reforms are a “laudable ambition” and a “good signal”. I agree with the right hon. Lady that things will be challenging, and there is a lot that we have to get right, but Harper Green school, where I was on GCSE results day, has brought in a new construction centre, and its courses for those who are 14 to 16 are massively oversubscribed. A couple of the young lads I met said to me, “I don’t really get on with English and maths, but I come to school every day because I get a great sense of achievement from building a brick wall.” It is those kinds of kids I am thinking about. I end by saying that I agree with a previous Education Secretary, who said: “For many years our education system has failed properly to value practical education, choosing to give far greater emphasis to purely academic achievements.” Well, I agree with Michael Gove. I think it is the first time I have said that.
I put on record my huge respect for my hon. Friend for chairing the Education Committee; I look forward to working closely with her and her Committee over the coming months. She has done fantastic work in this space. She is absolutely right: further education really is transformative, especially for some of the children who have been left behind by our broader education system. We have a number of reforms coming in that will help, and we have additional funding going in. I am particularly alive to issues with the transition from school to college and attendance at further education colleges. Those issues, and funding, are key focuses of the Alan Milburn review, which I am following closely. I hope to update the House once the report is published.
I thank the hon. Lady for her response. From the many exchanges that we had when I was the Leader of the House, I know what a doughty campaigner she is, and I am really looking forward to working with her in this role. The hon. Lady is absolutely right to say that we need parity of esteem between technical and academic subjects. I do not want there to be such a delineation between the two, because technical subjects can give new life to academic standards and vice versa. My vision, which we are now embarking on, is to have new high-quality technical and vocational qualifications available at 16. Students would look at a suite of those; they would not have to choose entirely academic or entirely technical subjects. Everyone will obviously have to do English, maths and science alongside that. My highly academic son, who is about to choose his options, would really like to get some applied qualifications as well. I want all our children to have these options open to them, and to have access to pathways that lead to similar destinations, but via different routes.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. There is just too big a jump between the classroom and the workplace at the moment, as employers tell us time and again. Tomorrow, I have a summit in No. 10 North, bringing together all our mayors, including the Mayor of the West Midlands, with business, school and college leaders, so that we can design real experiences of work and better careers advice, and close that gap between schools and the workplace.
I really hope that, on something as sensitive and important as special educational needs reform, we can come together across this House and recognise that reforms are necessary. They have been ducked, I would say, for too long. We have increasing amounts of money going in, but outcomes that are not good at all, and a very adversarial system that does not really work for anybody. That is why we are proceeding very carefully, in full consultation with parents. My good friend the Minister for School Standards and others have been right around the country doing hundreds of events. We are going through all the responses to the consultation with a fine-toothed comb, and I assure the hon. Member that the proposals we come forward with will take account of all the responses we have received.
My hon. Friend, as a former teacher, understands these issues well. There is a range of things we need to do. We are introducing new, high-quality, rigorous vocational and technical qualifications, which I think will be attractive to young people and their parents. We are looking at the incentives for schools; the changes to Progress 8 measures will encourage schools to offer a broad curriculum—not an increasingly narrow one—that they will be judged on. This is about supporting and working with teachers, so that they are excited about delivering these new options and courses. As we have seen, where these are embedded in schools, people vote with their feet and really take them up in high numbers.
Can I just say that I admire greatly our teaching profession? Teaching is not a job; it is a calling, and every day we should all thank our teachers for the amazing work they do. I want teachers to feel respected and valued, and to be attracted to the workforce. I feel that is my first priority. Yes, we will look at making sure that we have the teaching staff, but also at the preparation and the training that teachers need to adapt to these new courses, which we will bring in in a way that takes the workforce with us. However, I think there are real opportunities for teachers who are already teaching certain subjects to transfer those skills and combine them with technical education. This is also about teaching more practical skills for some current qualifications—drama, music, PE or even computing—in which there is very little practical assessment at the moment.
My hon. Friend is absolutely right. PISA measures are important, but they are not the whole picture. This is about improving outcomes and opportunities. Our announcements on technical pathways and qualifications are incredibly popular with students and parents. There is huge evidence for that. In a world of AI, which is transforming jobs and careers across the world, there are jobs that AI cannot replace: building a brick wall, or building a house; frankly, cutting my hair; looking after our parents or grandparents in a care home; or providing high-quality childcare support to our kids. Those jobs will never be taken over by AI, and that is why we need to support young people to access them.
There are discrepancies—these things can be very postcode-specific—which we will be addressing. The hon. Member will know that at the moment, we are going through quite a robust process with local authorities about their special educational needs plans and about their budgets and deficits. He can be assured that we are taking a very rigorous approach to that to make sure that local authorities really are delivering what people expect.