Caroline Voaden MP: speeches

Speeches

• 14 Sept 2026 · Curriculum and Assessment Review · Hansard source

  More

  The Government have committed to providing an enrichment entitlement for every child, including access to nature. Evidence shows that outdoor education can be part of the solution to some of the biggest issues facing our young people, such as the mental health and obesity crisis, the rise in NEETs and a failing SEND system. However, when a fifth of children in the most deprived parts of the country never spend meaningful time outdoors, something has to change. A framework for schools is not enough; we need a step change. Will the Secretary of State back my Outdoor Education Bill so that every child can grow up outdoors with better mental wellbeing, physical health, attainment, attendance and employability?

• 9 Sept 2026 · Pica Eating Disorder: SEND · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair today, Mr Betts, and I thank the hon. Member for Dagenham and Rainham (Margaret Mullane) for bringing this important topic to the House and for raising awareness of it in this place. As the hon. Member set out, pica is a condition most commonly associated with autism, learning disabilities and some mental health conditions, whereby a person compulsively eats non-food items such as soil, paper, hair, small objects or chemicals. This, of course, carries serious health risks, including choking, poisoning and internal injury, and in the most severe cases, it can be a cause of death. The specific causes of pica are not clear, but the bottom line is that people with pica, especially children, need support and management to help keep them safe. Pica is disproportionately prevalent among children and young people with autism and severe learning disabilities. Research estimates that between 20% and 23% of young autistic children engage in eating non-food items. We know that the more severe a child or adult’s learning disability is, the greater the chance they will display pica behaviour. School staff working in SEND settings, including mainstream schools with SEND pupils, special schools and early years settings, are therefore considerably more likely to encounter pica than the population at large. The Government’s SEND reforms, with their focus on inclusion, will undoubtedly be a cause of concern for parents of children with pica, who need to be reassured that their child will receive the support they need if they are going to be taught in mainstream education. When it comes to SEND, we can probably all agree that the status quo is not working. The SEND system is failing children every single day. After years of neglect under the Conservatives, it is failing to deliver the outcomes that children deserve and is driving local authorities to the brink, so we welcome the Government’s commitment to improve outcomes. Their reforms are an important step in the right direction, but many questions remain about funding, staffing and early intervention—all questions that parents of children with pica need to know the answers to. The Liberal Democrats will continue to press the Government to ensure that vulnerable children, including those with pica, get the support they need. One Liberal Democrat who has done just that is my hon. Friend the Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire). Unfortunately, she is unable to attend the debate, but her work to support one of her constituents whose child has pica illustrates how the system is currently failing such children. Her constituent lives in constant fear that as soon as she leaves the room, her child will eat something dangerous, such as carpet underlay, which could have fatal consequences. The National Pica Advisory Service—which I believe is represented in the Public Gallery—has been a vital resource for my hon. Friend’s constituent, for which I offer thanks, but it should not have to be. I repeat: children in the UK have died and will continue to die as a direct result of pica, yet no one is taking my hon. Friend’s constituent or pica as a whole seriously. Many medical professionals do not understand the condition, there is a fundamental lack of awareness and it is regularly dismissed as autism, even though it is a separate diagnosis. Importantly, there is a lack of formal support pathways and an absence of national guidelines, which is unacceptable. Children and young people living with pica and their families deserve so much better. Effective management of pica could include staff recognising the behaviour, understanding its triggers and applying consistent, safe strategies, such as de-picaing the environment, teaching children to discriminate between edible and non-edible items, and offering safe sensory or textual substitutes. If we are to have an inclusive SEND system that works for all children, including those with pica, schools and teachers must be equipped with the training they need to support these children. That is one reason why the Liberal Democrats would improve teacher training and continuing professional development, with a focus on identifying and supporting children with SEND, including those with autism, dyslexia or other neurodiverse conditions, such as pica. Being aware of this condition is the first step to keeping children safe. We have also consistently campaigned for putting early identification at the heart of any SEND interventions and reducing diagnostic delays by streamlining NHS processes and increasing funding for assessments. Awareness of behaviours such as pica is an important part of keeping pupils safe. Teachers and support staff need to be able to recognise pica when they see it. As a result, advice on recognising pica should be included in the new SEND training offer for teachers and support staff at a general level. However, although there needs to be a greater emphasis on teachers and support staff being able to identify conditions such as pica and other general barriers to learning as part of the SEND reforms, it should not be their responsibility to diagnose or offer detailed support. Knowing how to safely manage and support a child who is showing pica behaviour is a specialist skill, and more detailed advice and support must be available to teachers who have a child with pica in their class. That is why it is so important that the health element of an education, health and care plan actually means something. Currently, there is no legal footing for ensuring children, including those who have conditions such as pica or avoidant/restrictive food intake disorder, can access the healthcare they need as part of their education, health and care plan. We Liberal Democrats were disappointed that earlier this week the Health and Social Care Committee’s amendment was not added to the Health Bill. It would have given statutory footing to the “H” in EHCP, and helped children with pica and ARFID get the health support they so desperately need. It is also why we need to ensure that teachers have the help they need in the classroom, with more specialist staff in schools to meet neurodiverse children’s needs. We welcome the Experts at Hand service, but we cannot create these people out of thin air. Given the lack of such specialists, the Liberal Democrats are calling on the Government to publish a credible workforce plan to recruit and train the staff needed and to encourage trained specialists back into the profession. Pushing the emphasis on to individual teachers to spot and manage learning needs without new specialist capacity is a cost-saving measure, rather than a genuine improvement in support for our children. Teachers cannot be expected to have every form of SEND training required to meet the specific needs of every child, while also having all the skills necessary to teach the class. We cannot shove the burden of SEND on overworked, burnt-out teachers and expect good results for all children with special educational needs, as well as all the other children in the class. It is important to note that inclusion-focused SEND reforms will be deliverable only if we reduce wider pressures, such as workload, on educators. I recently ran a survey of teachers and got just under 1,000 responses. Nearly half of those teachers said they were planning to quit the classroom in the next five years, citing high workload as a key reason. That is why the Liberal Democrats are calling for proper enforcement of teachers’ legally mandated working hours, the introduction of reasonable limits on overtime and for all schools to be required to introduce flexible working policies. Returning to the topic of the debate, the Liberal Democrats are clear that children with pica must be kept safe if they are to be taught in mainstream school, and their parents deserve that guarantee, which I hope the Minister can provide. Every child with autism, dyslexia or another neurodiverse condition, such as pica, deserves the chance to thrive in school and move confidently on with their life and into work. With earlier assessment, better training for teachers, inclusive education and more specialist support, we can unlock the talents of neurodivergent young people and help them to thrive in life.

• 2 Sept 2026 · Rural Upper-tier Local Authorities · Hansard source

  More

  It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Ms Barker. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for North Shropshire (Helen Morgan) for securing this important debate. Before moving to rural South Devon in 2007, I had spent all my life living in and around major cities: Edinburgh, Sheffield and then London. After nearly 20 years living in the rural south-west, I can honestly say that I had previously not understood rural life because I had not lived it. I have since come to realise that the rural-urban divide is possibly one of the deepest divides in our country and one that is too often overlooked, especially by Governments made up of city and urban MPs who simply do not understand the reality of rural communities and fail to see the deprivation that lurks behind the hedgerows. Those communities are often forgotten when spending decisions are taken despite a set of circumstances that mean we desperately need the Government’s financial backing. Incomes are lower due to the older average age, jobs are often seasonal and low-waged, people in rural areas travel almost twice as far as those in urban areas, and there is often no public transport. Healthcare is a challenge because community services have been cut, hospitals are miles away and hospital transport has all but disappeared. High-speed internet is crucial when services are scarce, yet broadband connectivity lags far behind urban areas. Banks, pubs and post offices are closing, hollowing out communities and increasing rural isolation. As the hon. Members for Camborne and Redruth (Perran Moon), for St Austell and Newquay (Noah Law) and for Truro and Falmouth (Jayne Kirkham)—all of them from Cornwall—have said, the high number of second homes, high house prices and low wages massively exacerbates the housing affordability crisis. In Devon, the full-time salary to house price ratio is 10.6:1—well above England’s average of 8.7:1. Despite all that, funding is persistently driven into urban areas while rural communities are left behind. The previous Conservative Government forced councils to do more with less. Their policy to force local authorities to use their reserves to subsidise their revenue expenditure was deeply wrong and, as a result, six rural upper-tier local authorities are on the brink of issuing section 114 notices, which would effectively declare them bankrupt. The current Government have committed to providing multi-year funding settlements for local authorities, which we welcome, but for rural communities the 2026-27 to 2028-29 settlement falls well short. The withdrawal of the rural services delivery grant was a huge blow to councils in Devon, costing about £14 million, and no rural councils benefited from the replacement funding or recovery grant. The new formulas mean that local authorities in cities will have higher spending power than in previous years while rural shire districts will have less to spend. Under the local government finance settlement for this year, urban councils will receive 32% more per head in Government-funded spending than rural councils. Devon county council will receive £1,056 in core spending power per head compared to Hackney council’s £1,645 or Liverpool city council’s £1,598. It does not cost 50% more to provide services in Hackney or Liverpool than in Devon. In fact, I would argue it potentially costs less because of the rurality. Furthermore, the Government’s 2026-29 local government finance settlement does not include any explicit support for rural upper-tier authorities. The new formula has included remoteness only as an uplift in the formula for adult social care. As my hon. Friend the Member for Horsham (John Milne) said, a rural child is not easier to service than a rural adult. It is utterly shocking that the Government do not believe that remoteness is relevant to the delivery of any other service, such as school transport or waste collection. It goes way beyond the additional time it takes to travel. Rural councils have several other considerations that urban councils simply do not have to contend with, including requiring more service centres due to the spread-out population and more professionals to cover visits across a huge rural area. They receive fewer responses to contract tenders, perhaps only getting one from the incumbent provider, which leads to a market with increased prices for services. There are physical constraints such as needing smaller refuse vehicles, especially on the narrow lanes near where I live in Devon. Those vehicles have to return to base to be emptied more often, and rural areas also need multiple depots for equipment and vehicles. Thus, they need more equipment to service the streets and more drivers. Pockets of deprivation, often hidden by prettiness, are particularly hard hit. Social mobility for young people living in deprived rural areas is one of the lowest in the country. None of this is considered in the new funding formula outside of adult social care. I urge the Minister to review that. Quite simply, the new system of allocation does not recognise that the sparse and isolated nature of rural areas drives higher costs for the delivery of essential services, creates challenges in recruitment of staff for key services and requires local authorities to provide a greater public subsidy for the provision of public transport. This is very much in keeping with a Labour Government that have persistently failed to acknowledge that every service is harder to deliver across rural areas. Let me use Devon to illustrate why this service delivery is so tough. Rural Devon is a drive of over 100 miles from north to south. It would take me 10 hours to walk across just my constituency, which is a fraction of the county, and nowhere near the biggest. I am not sure how Manchesterism will translate to rural areas, but we cannot apply the same principles to a city of 3 million people and villages with just 10 houses and expect to see the same results. The trajectory for rural councils over the next three years is deeply concerning. The very limited increase in Government funding will require service reductions or significant increases in council tax or business rate income to maintain core spending power. As has been said, rural residents will pay 17% more in council tax per head compared to urban residents this year, yet Government funding will be directed towards urban authorities. The Government are relying on a regressive council tax to fund services in rural areas that it was never meant to. As a result of this funding settlement, by 2028-29 urban councils will have seen a 20% increase in Government-funded spending power, compared to only 2% for rural councils. How can that be fair? These are not just numbers on a spreadsheet; we are talking about people’s lives. From the growing number of children with SEND who cannot access the support they need to the closing of vital community spaces like libraries and leisure centres, this lack of funding has a real impact on people. We are concerned by the Government’s decision to allocate additional funding within the local government finance settlement on a need and demand basis. It will jeopardise the sustainability of rural local councils. The Liberal Democrats oppose the three-year local government finance settlement, which does not go far enough in providing a truly fair funding settlement to all local authorities across the board. We urge the Government to provide rural councils with a funding settlement that reflects the true impact of rurality and sparsity of the areas they serve through the application of the fair funding formula. The ability to provide services to people in my constituency and across rural Devon will only be made worse by the proposal for four unitary authorities recently chosen by the Government for the local government reorganisation in Devon. I urge the Minister to bear with me on this. That proposal from Labour-run Plymouth and Exeter will see those two cities massively expanded, to the great delight of their Labour MPs, and a new urban growth area based around Torbay, leaving a fourth authority—the bits that were left behind when the urban areas were gouged out—stretching 70 miles from Ilfracombe in the north to Salcombe in the south, but 100 miles by road. That authority will have to maintain a road network not dissimilar to the whole of Luxembourg’s with no major town to offer opportunities for growth and regeneration and the most deprived area of Devon to support.

• 2 Sept 2026 · Rural Upper-tier Local Authorities · Hansard source

  More

  I absolutely agree. The Government ignored local voices and went with the proposal that came fourth out of five in a public consultation, but was backed by Labour council leaders and Labour MPs who had the ear of Ministers and wanted to expand their cities. None of my constituents want it. I have spent the whole summer listening to distressed residents, as has my neighbour, the hon. Member for South West Devon (Rebecca Smith). The chosen proposal was a blatant prioritisation of economic growth for the cities of Plymouth and Exeter at the expense of the economic and social cohesion of rural Devon. How do the Government expect this council to be financially viable when they deem remoteness irrelevant to the delivery of every service except adult social care, and when no one can even work out where the authority could be based? How can rural Devon expect growth in every postcode when there is clearly no consideration of the economic growth potential for rural Devon in the chosen proposal? The Prime Minister talked yesterday about supporting rural areas and not creating a two-tier country, but the Government have created a two-tier Devon. I urge the Minister to listen to the many Devon MPs and the local people, go back to the drawing board on the reorganisation in Devon, look at the alternative options that were on the table, and pick one that will not leave rural communities struggling even more than they are now. If we are to have any hope of bridging the urban-rural divide, a fair funding settlement for rural councils and local government reorganisation that works for rural areas must be the start. If the Prime Minister wants a political system and economy that works for every person in the country, the Government must change the way they value and recognise rural communities.

• 14 Jul 2026 · Social Prescribing · Hansard source

  More

  I agree that social prescribers do a fantastic job. I recently met members of Veterans Outdoors near Totnes, and visited the Vounder Therapy Garden at the Eden Project through the parliamentary knowledge schemes. Those organisations are doing incredible work, turning lives around, particularly for those with mental health challenges, but their projects receive absolutely no funding, although the National Academy for Social Prescribing has identified a return of up to £8.56 for every £1 invested. How does the Department expect them to survive and broaden their reach without funding? Given their cost-effectiveness, will the Government commit themselves not just to funding the link worker and the social prescriber, but to encouraging integrated care boards to fund those amazing projects?

• 7 Jul 2026 · Outdoor Education · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That leave be given to bring in a Bill to require that all children in primary and secondary education spend a minimum of thirty minutes a day outdoors during school hours; to require primary and secondary schools to provide a minimum of one lesson of teaching each week outdoors; to require that every child be offered at least one outdoor education experience during primary school years and at least one such experience during secondary school years; and for connected purposes. Modern medicine is always looking for the next big discovery to change lives, yet we are missing out on the cheapest, easiest and quickest way to turn around the vicious mental health crisis we see in our children and young people—a crisis that affects their ability to learn, to achieve, to work and to live a healthy and happy life. The answer is outdoor learning. It is staggering to read that the amount of time children spend outside has fallen by 50% in a single generation, that children roam just 300 metres from home and that a fifth of children in the most deprived parts of the country never spend meaningful time outdoors. Research shows that being out in nature makes children happy, that children who spend time outside care more about nature and that unstructured, risky, nature-based play outdoors improves confidence and cognitive development. Research funded by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs through Natural England found that 95% of children found outdoor learning made lessons more enjoyable, and that 90% reported an improvement in students’ engagement with learning and an increase in student health and wellbeing. These figures are staggering, and they deserve to be taken seriously. This Bill is about improving the lives of our children and young people and, by using outdoor learning, raising a generation of people who will care more about nature, which is the one thing we know will protect us from the most devastating effects of climate change. Andy Jasper, the chief executive officer of the Eden Project, told us last week on a brilliant parliamentary visit that there simply will be no future without nature. Shockingly, a third of children never have school lessons outdoors, yet in many schools in South Devon outdoor learning is a regular weekly part of the curriculum, in playgrounds, school veg gardens, parks and little bits of woodland. Children who live the furthest distance from green or open outdoor spaces spend more time on screens and have poorer mental health than children living in close proximity. A lack of time spent outdoors is linked to childhood health disorders such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, obesity and depression. However, it is not just kids from the inner city who are missing out on the benefits of the great outdoors. In my beautiful constituency of South Devon there is a stark disparity that might surprise many in this House. I often hear of children who live just a couple of miles from our stunning beaches but have never been to them. There are few buses to the beach and the parking costs are a serious barrier for some. This mirrors research showing that young people in communities all around the UK coast view the beach as “not for them”, but for visitors and tourists. This is why taking kids outdoors to do lessons at school is so vital to introducing them to the idea of being in nature and developing a familiarity with the great outdoors. There is not a subject on the curriculum that cannot be enhanced by outdoor learning. The Fibonacci sequence is seen in the petals of a flower, the scales of a pine cone and the seeds of a sunflower. English, science, music, poetry, drama and geography can all be enhanced by teaching outside. As one child said: “When we were on the field trip, we did maths, English and science, but it was like we didn’t realise we were doing it”. For teachers, that is pure magic. Totnes St John’s Church of England primary school is located in a large housing estate and has a 44% special educational needs and disabilities cohort. Its brilliant example could be replicated by schools up and down the country. The headteacher told me that her pupils regularly use the school’s outdoor spaces to support emotional regulation, and that this is incredibly effective. She said: “They thrive outdoors, so we take as much learning as possible into our grounds. Delivering learning in this experiential, immersive and hands-on way makes it more purposeful, as well as easier for children to understand and retain.” The school has adapted its uniform to enable children to be outside as much as possible, regardless of the weather—all the children have wellies in school. At Blackawton and East Allington, children have a dedicated afternoon of forest school and an hour of outdoor PE every week. Headteacher Liam Fielding said: “The opportunities to explore, problem solve, take risks, work collaboratively and simply spend time outdoors have a significant impact on children’s confidence, resilience and wellbeing. For some children, particularly those who may struggle within a traditional classroom environment, outdoor learning provides a different opportunity to succeed, develop relationships and build self-esteem. We regularly see children return to the classroom calmer, more focused and more ready to learn after spending time outdoors—phonics in the mud, maths with sticks”. I was thrilled to be able to connect Harbertonford Church of England primary school with volunteers from Force 4 Nature, who turned up and built raised veg beds in the playground so the pupils can learn how to grow healthy food, which they can eat in school. This kind of learning is straightforward and can engage those who struggle in a traditional classroom environment; the child who can be disruptive in the classroom is hard to spot once outside with the whole class. However, this takes confidence from school leaders and teachers, so it is crucial that outdoor learning features in continuing professional development and training. I want a curriculum and assessment review that includes outdoor learning, which Ofsted should include as a plus when assessing how schools are performing. Any school in the country can open its doors and take learning outside. To take it one step further is the holy grail: the outdoor residential. I still remember the school trips I enjoyed at the Lagganlia centre, near Aviemore—the experiences have stayed with me for many decades. However, we are still waiting to see Labour’s access to nature Green Paper, which the Government promised in this Parliament. That creates uncertainty for those who deliver programmes that provide such invaluable opportunities. The Government have also decided not to renew the generation green programme, which provided access to nature, through structured outdoor learning, residentials, farm visits and more, to over 125,000 children, including 26,000 from the most disadvantaged communities. The recent Milburn review is clear that mental health has become a primary driver of youth disengagement, not a secondary consideration. Rising anxiety, neurodiversity and long-term health conditions are reshaping who participates in post-16 education. If we want to help our young people achieve more, getting them outside is a good place to start. Yes, residentials cost money, but let us talk about the return on investment. DEFRA-funded research from the University of Cumbria demonstrates a social return on investment of £4.32 for every £1 spent on outdoor education as part of the curriculum. The Scottish Government have already acted on this, and we should too. Outdoor residentials can literally change lives. They pull kids out of their comfort zone and teach them that they can do things they thought were impossible. Activities teach teamwork and problem solving, improve self-belief and build friendships. Those are the skills that will give children the resilience to help them cope with all the stuff that life throws at them as they grow up. They also offer space to connect with peers and teachers in a new way, offering valuable side-by-side moments. “It’s like being in Minecraft” is a phrase often heard as the kids walk through the woods near Beesands in South Devon. For many children who come here to experience the great outdoors on a school residential, this will be the first time they have set foot in a wood. They might be nervous of sitting on the grass, or find it hard to walk down a steep grassy field towards the sea, but all these little moments are teaching them resilience. Pete and Andrea Moore both gave up traditional teaching jobs to open the brilliant Forest and Beach outdoors centre, such was their passion for teaching children the value of experiencing the outdoors, not just seeing it on a screen. Kurt Mockridge, who runs Grenville House outdoor education centre in Brixham, told me of kids who come to his centre from a primary school just the top of the hill but who have never been down to the beach or in the water that is right on their doorstep. Parents who do not have the familiarity, confidence or time may struggle to take their kids out. That is why such trips are so crucial, especially for those from more deprived areas. For many young people living in urban areas, their only realistic opportunity to experience nature comes through residential outdoor learning, where they are taken out of their local environment altogether. By building their confidence in the outdoors, we instil in them a respect for, and understanding of, nature, which will be crucial as we face the challenges of a changing climate. We simply cannot expect future generations to nurture our planet if they do not understand the wonder of nature. For the mental health and wellbeing of our children and young people, for the enhanced learning outcomes that they will gain, for the joy of learning and for the future of this planet that we call home, I commend this Bill to the House. Question put and agreed to . Ordered, That Caroline Voaden, Tim Farron, Dr Roz Savage, Dr Danny Chambers, Maya Ellis, Sir Julian Lewis and Chris Law present the Bill. Caroline Voaden accordingly presented the Bill. Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 16 October, and to be printed (Bill 111).