Helen Hayes MP: speeches

Speeches

• 18 May 2026 · Youth Justice · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for his statement and welcome the publication of the White Paper. Education has a vital role to play in reducing youth offending. There is a strong link between the offences committed by young people and educational disengagement earlier in their lives. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that the Department for Education’s work on persistent absence, exclusions, special educational needs and disabilities, and support for care-experienced young people is properly joined up to ensure that the Government have a focus on removing disengagement from education and reducing youth offending? I welcome the work that the Secretary of State has asked the Children’s Commissioner to do on the quality of education in young offender institutions, but we already know that the quality of that education is abysmally poor and that action is urgently needed. Will he set a timescale for that work, so that we know when we will see the positive change that is so urgently needed?

• 22 Apr 2026 · Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill · Hansard source

  More

  I agree with the hon. Member—and, indeed, with the Opposition Front Bencher, the right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott)—that the ban must be on the basis that phones are not in bags during the school day, but are removed from children while they are at school. The point I was making was really about children who need to have their phone with them. There will be some exceptions, and the question of how that is worked through in the guidance is important for protecting those children from the pressures that might come with being the only child in a classroom who has access to their phone. Drawing up a list of exceptions is more straightforward than deciding how those exceptions should be managed in a classroom environment, so I hope the Minister will be able to provide some assurance on that point. I now turn to Lords amendment 38. Yesterday, in the first of two evidence sessions on screentime and social media that are designed to enable the Select Committee to contribute to the Government’s consultation, we heard from three companies: TikTok, Meta and Roblox. Next week, we will hear from Snapchat, which withdrew from yesterday’s session at very short notice, much to our disappointment. We also heard from academics undertaking research in this area. It was absolutely clear from the evidence those three companies gave us that we cannot continue to rely on the companies whose platforms are causing the problem to regulate themselves out of it. I think that parents and carers across the country would have been incredulous had they listened to our evidence session yesterday. We heard Meta say that it did not believe that its apps were in any way addictive, when it has just lost a court case in the US on that precise point. We listened to TikTok say that it was horrified that children were coming to harm on its site, as if that was a rare exception, when a police investigation found that such harm is widespread. We heard Roblox express confidence that exploitation cannot happen on its site, when an independent expert recently said that the risks of children coming to harm on Roblox were so high that children should never be left unattended while using it.

• 14 Apr 2026 · Knife Crime · Hansard source

  More

  I welcome the publication of this strategy, and I pay tribute to the Minister for her strong commitment over many years to this area of policy and the depth of her thinking on it. In my constituency, we have seen far too many horrific tragedies. Out of those tragedies, however, has come some truly exceptional work in response from the community and from our grassroots youth-led organisations, in providing services that support young people. Those services provide positive opportunities for young people, help the community to come to terms with the trauma they have experienced and set young people back on a positive track. However, those organisations tell me that they struggle to access long-term sustainable funding. What is the Minister doing as part of this strategy to ensure that our youth organisations can keep the lights on and do their important work as part of the infrastructure of services that we need to tackle this problem?

• 5 Mar 2026 · World Book Day · Hansard source

  More

  That is a wonderfully creative way to engage children, not only in reading but in a wider and important area of learning. I pay particular tribute to the schools and public libraries across my constituency of Dulwich and West Norwood; they are going above and beyond this week. I also pay tribute to the wealth of independent bookshops with which my constituency is particularly blessed, including the Paper Cat children’s bookshop, where I recently had the privilege of meeting the Gruffalo in person, and to the brilliant Stepping into Stories children’s literary festival, which goes from strength to strength each year. The core purpose of World Book Day is to promote reading for fun. World Book Day is the UK’s largest reading for pleasure campaign and is run by a charity of the same name. World Book Day is a delivery partner for the National Year of Reading. This year it is encouraging children to “Go All In” for World Book Day. The charity distributes 23.5 million £1 book tokens annually—sent to every UK primary school, plus secondary schools and nurseries on request—which children can exchange for a book from a selection chosen with the input of children and publishers. World Book Day is enormously successful. In 2025, 91% of UK children aged five to eight took part in a World Book Day activity, and 93% of UK adults are aware of the event. A quarter of children on free school meals said that the first book they owned came as a result of the World Book Day £1 book tokens. This is important because reading has such enormous benefits. A child who is read to at ages one to two scores more highly in reading, spelling, grammar and numeracy skills at ages eight to 11. Reading for pleasure at ages 10 to 16 has a substantial positive effect on vocabulary, spelling and maths performance by the age of 16. Children who are read to frequently at age five are over half a school year ahead in reading performance at age 15 compared with those who are read to infrequently or not at all. For children growing up in poverty, being read to daily at age five is significantly associated with a greater chance of avoiding poverty in adulthood. The Education Committee, which I Chair, has heard that reading for pleasure is a “driver of social mobility” and an “anti-poverty strategy”. Reading helps develop children’s vocabulary. Studies have shown that the language used in books is more complex than spoken language, helping children learn more words and get used to more complex sentence structures. Reading has been shown to help develop empathy, especially towards stigmatised groups. Professor Jessie Ricketts, professor of psychology at Royal Holloway, University of London, said that reading allows children to learn about things outside of their own experiences. She said: “When we pick up a book, there may be characters and environments that are not part of our lived experience. That is particularly important for people who are not moving around much and may not have access to those things.” Shared reading in the early years improves emotional closeness between child and caregiver. It lifts the parent’s mood, increases warmth and reduces stress, enabling the sensitive and nurturing interactions that young children need to thrive. Reading also helps children with their cognitive development. Reading with young children helps develop their attention and memory skills, and learning to read helps develop the area of the brain responsible for processing language. Evidence from neuroscience states: “There is clear evidence that learning to read shapes the brain, resulting in the tuning of an area specialising in word processing”. Yet despite this huge range of benefits, the number of children reading for pleasure—choosing of their own volition to read when they have a choice about how to spend their time—is declining. The National Literacy Trust’s annual literacy survey 2025 found that the percentage of children and young people who enjoy reading is at its lowest in 20 years, with just one in three children and young people aged eight to 18 saying that they enjoy reading in their free time. That is a decrease of a third since 2005. Fewer than one in five children and young people aged eight to 18 read something daily in their free time in 2025. The decline is not evenly distributed across all demographics. Girls are significantly more likely to read for pleasure than boys. In 2025, 39% of girls aged eight to 18 said that they enjoy reading, compared with just 26% of boys. Reading for pleasure also declines as children get older. Among children aged five to eight, 63% say that they enjoy reading, declining to 47% of eight to 11-year-olds, 30% of 11 to 14-year-olds and 29% of 14 to 16-year-olds. The situation in England is substantially worse than internationally, with the most recent progress in international reading literacy study in 2021 finding that 29% of English pupils said they “very much like” reading, compared with the international average of 42%. Children’s reading patterns are not established in a vacuum. It is striking that a recent BookTrust survey found that 70% of parents and carers said they face challenges in sharing books with their child. That rises significantly to 75% for those parents on low incomes. It is in that context that the Education Committee is undertaking an inquiry on reading for pleasure. We are exploring why there has been a generational shift in reading for pleasure and what can be done to reverse the trend. We are looking across the sector to assess the role of schools, early years settings, libraries, parents, authors, publishers and more, and we are looking at the different groups of children and families who are least likely to read for pleasure and how they can be supported to read more. So far, the inquiry has received around 180 pieces of written evidence and has held two oral evidence sessions during which we have heard from academics, charities and experts. I would like to put on record my thanks to children and their teachers from Mulberry Canon Barnett primary school, who came into Parliament today to talk to the Committee about their experiences of reading. The evidence we have received cites a number of possible reasons for the decline in reading for pleasure. Barriers to children’s reading for pleasure include an increase in recreational screen use. Onyinye Iwu, a children’s author and secondary school art teacher, said that her pupils told her, “we have TikTok. What’s the point?” As she continued, “You’ve got TikTok, you’ve got Netflix, you’ve got the film coming out, so why would you read the book?” We also heard that the focus on reading proficiency and an overcrowded curriculum can mean that reading for pleasure is seen as a “nice to have”, crowded out of the everyday practice of some schools. A Department for Education survey found that 21% of parents of secondary-aged pupils and 14% of parents of primary-aged pupils said their children were too busy with homework to find time for reading. We have heard that cuts to library services and school libraries have limited access to books. Local authority spending on public libraries decreased from £1.5 billion in 2009-10 to £673 million in 2022-23, followed by a slight increase the following year. The Great School Libraries campaign found that there were 10% fewer libraries in secondary schools between 2019 and 2022, and that 15% of secondary schools had a library but no budget at all for it. I warmly welcome the Government’s commitment to ensure that every primary school has a school library by the end of this Parliament and to provide funding for secondary school libraries. The lack of a quiet reading environment due to overcrowded housing and reduced community provision is also making a difference to the reading habits of children from the lowest income backgrounds. The evidence also points to a decline in reading among adults, leading to less shared reading with children and less role-modelling of reading by adults. The Reading Agency found that only 53% of UK adults now read regularly for pleasure, compared with 58% in 2015. Children are more than twice as likely to report seeing parents relax by watching TV than by reading. Luke Taylor, senior researcher at the Centre for Social Justice, told the Committee that it is particularly important for boys to see men reading, and highlighted a lack of male role models as a factor in the lower levels of reading among boys. It is also important that children can find themselves in books. Children from minoritised communities are particularly likely to say that they do not see themselves in what they read. Only 24% of children’s books published in 2024 featured a racially minoritised character. Onyinye Iwu said that although there was a boom in ethnically diverse books in 2020, it has not been sustained. The Committee also reviewed evidence on what works to get children reading. We have heard that connecting reading to children’s interests is important. The National Literacy Trust survey found that two in five children and young people were motivated to read when material related to a favourite film or TV series, or matched their interests or hobbies. Debbie Hicks, creative director at the Reading Agency, told the Committee that tying reading in with interests such as sports, music or science, technology, engineering and maths can offer “really familiar entry points for reluctant readers.” Our witnesses spoke of the need for “mirrors and windows” to ensure that children are represented in books while also being exposed to different cultures and experiences. Onyinye Iwu said that there has been a “big jump forward” in the availability of books with diverse characters and stories, but a much narrower range of authors is still being regularly highlighted and promoted in shops and in the curriculum. Witnesses spoke of the need for children to have genuine “choice and agency” over what they read. The National Literacy Trust survey found that a quarter of children said that being free to choose what they wanted to read was a motivating factor. The Committee has heard that children with special educational needs and disabilities, especially those with dyslexia, can struggle to access traditional texts. Ellen Broomé, the chief executive officer of the British Dyslexia Association, said that dyslexic children can find reading “difficult, exhausting and something they avoid” and that they can have “feelings of failure and embarrassment and stigma around their reading.” The evidence that we have received has emphasised the importance of accessible texts for children with SEND and ensuring that read-for-pleasure initiatives are inclusive. We have also heard that seeing reading as a social activity is a motivating factor for children. Children are motivated to read by social factors such as having opportunities to discuss books with their peers or—as we heard from children at Mulberry Canon Barnett primary school this morning—to act out the story in class or have the opportunity to continue or finish the story themselves. Professor Jessie Ricketts highlighted the special importance of social factors for teenagers, as they are “very much guided by what their peers think” and often do not see reading as a social activity. There is much to be learned from World Book Day for the encouragement of reading for pleasure all year round. Professor Teresa Cremin told the Committee that teachers should aim to “spread World Book Day practice…throughout the year” by supporting children to read in their own time and to develop the habit of reading. She said: “If you had a rich reading pedagogy in your classroom, every day is World Book Day. Every day I am trying to support you 32 as readers. It is my job...not an occasional piece”. Jonathan Douglas, chief executive of the National Literacy Trust, and Annie Crombie, co-chief executive of BookTrust, told the Committee that events such as World Book Day have “immense value” in creating a buzz of excitement around reading and making partners on the ground feel that they are part of something bigger. However, they highlighted the need for that to be built on a wider infrastructure of reading activity throughout the year. The Education Committee will make our recommendations to the Government later this year. The benefits of reading for pleasure for children and adults are enormous; they speak directly to some of the most significant challenges that children and young people face around mental health and wellbeing and the impacts of screen time and social media. Reversing the decline must therefore be an urgent priority. I will end by once again thanking everyone who is involved in supporting this year’s World Book Day and the National Year of Reading. Whether they are marking World Book Day by dressing up as their favourite character or simply curling up in a corner with a good book, I hope they enjoy the day.

• 4 Dec 2025 · Camden Nursery Sexual Abuse Case · Hansard source

  More

  I thank the Secretary of State for her statement. Vincent Chan’s crimes are utterly horrific—the most egregious breach of trust imaginable, and every parent’s worst nightmare. My thoughts and, I know, the thoughts of the whole House have been with the children who are his victims, and with their families, ever since news of his crimes came into the public domain. Incidents like this one, and the recent case of Roksana Lecka, who was convicted of abusing children at two nurseries, raise serious concerns about the effectiveness of Ofsted’s early years inspection regime, which currently rates 98% of providers as good or outstanding. What is the Secretary of State doing to ensure that Ofsted urgently brings forward reform of its early years inspection framework, so that it is fit for purpose? Will she review the current requirements for safeguarding training for early years practitioners, and the use of CCTV, to ensure that all staff are appropriately trained and the requirements are fit for purpose? The Secretary of State’s colleagues in the Home Office have decided not to implement the version of mandatory reporting of child sexual abuse recommended by Professor Alexis Jay in the independent inquiry into child sexual abuse report, citing the workload that it would create. Does the Secretary of State agree that workload should not be a consideration when it comes to the safety of children? Will she urge her colleagues in the Home Office to rethink that decision, and to implement the more robust mandatory reporting obligation set out by Professor Jay, which includes criminal sanctions for non-compliance? Finally, the Secretary of State spoke about the support that is quite rightly being provided to the victims of Vincent Chan and their families. Can she say a bit more about how support will be made available to those children and their families in such a way that they can draw on it throughout their life, whenever they need it?

• 30 Oct 2025 · Children’s Social Care · Hansard source

  More

  I beg to move, That this House has considered the Fourth Report of the Education Committee, Children’s social care, HC 430, and the Government response, HC 1350. It is a pleasure to see you in the Chair, Dr Huq. I am grateful to the Liaison Committee for granting time for this debate on the Education Committee’s report on children’s social care and the Government’s response. I am particularly pleased that the debate is taking place on the eve of Care Leavers Month, a time of more intensive focus on children’s social care and the support provided to care leavers. The inquiry was launched by our predecessor Committee in December 2023 to take a comprehensive look at the children’s social care system as a whole. It was interrupted by the general election, but the new Committee decided that the work was too important to drop, and agreed to progress the inquiry to a conclusion. In total, the Committee held eight oral evidence sessions. We heard from a range of experts across the sector, and I am particularly pleased that we held an oral evidence session with four care-experienced young people, who spoke powerfully of their experiences of children’s social care and their hopes for reform. Children’s social care comprises a set of vital services that support some of our most vulnerable children. Those services include early help and support for families, safeguarding, the care of looked-after children, support for disabled children, and a range of other services. They encompass some of the gravest responsibilities of the state, yet we know that they are under intense pressure. The erosion of funding, combined with increasing need, has resulted in a situation in which many services are struggling to deliver in a way that is genuinely child-centred. All too often, looked-after children are placed far from home. The outcomes for care-experienced young people are shockingly poor. In 2022, the current Minister, the Under-Secretary of State for Education, my hon. Friend the Member for Whitehaven and Workington (Josh MacAlister), who was responsible at the time for the independent review of children’s social care commissioned by the previous Government, said that the system was in need of a total reset. Although the situation is very serious, that is in no way to deny the extraordinarily hard work and commitment we see among those who work to support children in the care system, and I pay tribute to them at the start of the debate. Social workers, support workers, advocates, foster carers, kinship carers and many others step in to support the most vulnerable children and to try to deliver a secure and solid foundation for their childhood. However, our inquiry found that many of the problems highlighted by the independent review of children’s social care persist and, in a significant number of cases, have worsened since the review. Witnesses criticised the piecemeal approach to reform, which has focused on new short-term initiatives in a small number of areas, rather than comprehensive change. There has been a rising need for children’s social care over the past decade. The number of looked-after children has risen by over 20% in the past 10 years, standing at 83,630 in 2024. Over the same period, the rate of looked- after children has increased from 60 to 70 per 10,000 children in the population. The number of section 47 inquiries per year in response to child protection concerns has risen by 57% over the past decade. That rising need has been in direct correlation to the erosion of funding for early help and support services, such as Sure Start, which played such a critical role in preventing families from reaching crisis point. That is leading to a severe shortage of placements for children in care. In 2024, 45% of looked-after children were placed outside their local authority, and 22% were placed over 20 miles from home. The inquiry heard distressing accounts from care-experienced young people who had been placed far from home. One young person had experienced racism for the first time when she was placed in an area with a very different demographic from her home area. Another had had to get up at 4 am and take long-distance trains to school while on a respite placement because her foster family were on holiday. Another had chosen not to pursue higher education, having experienced such frequent moves during her time in care. There is an acute shortage of foster care placements. The need for 6,500 new foster carers in England has left local authorities over-reliant on expensive private children’s home providers, despite evidence of disgraceful profiteering in parts of the sector. We found that some local authorities do much better than others at keeping their looked-after children close to home and avoiding the spot purchasing of expensive and often poor-quality private residential places. Our report recommended that the Department publish a national sufficiency strategy for children’s social care and require all local authorities to develop and publish strategies for reducing the number of out-of-area placements. The Department’s response states: “While we do not believe a national sufficiency strategy would be responsive enough to children’s needs at a local level, we are working closely with the two RCC” —regional care co-operative— “pathfinder areas and supporting improved placement commissioning and forecasting”. I would like to press the Minister on that. The purpose of a national sufficiency strategy would be to give the Government additional leverage in ironing out the significant variation in practice between local authorities. Local authorities should be adopting best practice on the provision of care placements. We know that some do that really well and therefore have very few children who are not in the borough. Without a national strategy, however, it is hard to see how the Government can grip the extent of the variation. In response to the severe shortage of foster carers, we recommended that the Department put in place a national fostering strategy and consult on introducing a national register of foster carers. The Department’s response states that it is “considering the potential costs and benefits of a national register of foster carers”, but it does not commit to a national strategy. For many years now, the only method of foster carer recruitment has been advertising, but that is simply not delivering. The conversion rate is shocking: only 6% of people who express an interest in fostering put in an application to do so, and only 32% of applications are eventually approved. That tells us that we need a more comprehensive approach that seeks not only to drum up interest but to seek proactively to address some of the barriers to fostering, particularly those in relation to housing, and to deliver better support and respite arrangements for foster carers. The inquiry heard about the crucial role played by kinship carers, who step in to look after a child within their network of family or friends when the child’s biological parents are unable to do so. We heard from a young person who described kinship care as “a loving, caring, beautiful environment where I felt nurtured and valued”. Kinship care is often the best arrangement for children whose parents cannot look after them, as it helps them to maintain secure attachments within their family. However, the Committee also heard about the financial struggles faced by kinship carers, including the fact that 67% of children in kinship care live in a deprived household. Kinship carers act out of love, but they should not be forced into poverty for doing so. Our report recommended that the new allowance for kinship carers should be on a par with the allowance for foster carers, and that entitlements to kinship leave should be included in the Government’s review of the parental leave system. The Department’s response states that the parental leave review will look at support for kinship carers, but it does not commit to setting the kinship allowance at the same level as support for foster carers. I press the Minister to look carefully at that. There are much higher costs, both to children and to the public purse, when a kinship arrangement breaks down and a local authority has to fund a foster placement or a children’s home placement for a child. Kinship carers are the unsung heroes of children’s social care, and they need to be properly supported. Our report concluded: “It is unacceptable that the continuation of the Adoption and Special Guardianship Support Fund was not announced until 1 April 2025, leaving families and children uncertain about the future of their support.” We recommended that the Department end the annual cliff edge of uncertainty faced by adoptive families and make funding for the adoption and special guardianship support fund permanent. We also expressed our concern about the decision to limit the funding per child within the ASGSF and recommended that the Government keep a very close watch on the impact of that decision and reinstate the previous level of funding rapidly if there are significant adverse effects. The Department’s response confirmed that funding for the adoption and special guardianship support fund has been committed for 2026-27, but it did not commit to making the fund permanent. Our inquiry heard that outcomes for care-experienced young people are far worse on many measures than for their non-care-experienced peers. That is a shocking indication of the failures of the children’s social care system. Some 39% of care leavers aged 19 to 21 are not in education, employment or training, compared with 13% of all young people aged 19 to 21. Only 15% of care leavers go to university by the age of 19, compared with 46% of children who have not been in care. Approximately one in four—perhaps more—of the adult prison population has been in care, and between 30% and 50% of homeless people are estimated to have spent time in care. Our inquiry heard about the financial difficulties faced by young people on leaving care. One young person, Jake Hartley, had to use food banks and borrow money to pay bills after turning 18. Louise Fitt told us that she had to drop A-levels after turning 18 due to the need to work and support herself financially. She said: “I always wanted an education, but I had to sacrifice that because I have to eat, I have to have a roof over my head; that is so important. We should not have to choose between that. We should be allowed to study if we want to… It is not nice being left on your own at 18 to go into the adult world and to figure it out.” The report recommended that the Department for Education develop a national care offer to harmonise support for care leavers across the country. In response, the Department stated that it had launched a new website “which brings together all relevant information in an easily accessible format.” I want to press the Minister on that point. Care leavers should not face a postcode lottery for support. There is simply no justification for that. A website with information about the inconsistent support available in different areas is not the same as a national care offer. My Committee is clear that the Government should commit to a national offer to ensure that no care-experienced young person falls through the cracks and that care-experienced young people can feel confident to move, go to university or take up employment without feeling that their aspirations are constrained by worries about whether they will be supported. Our report also expressed concerns about the Government’s proposal to reduce support through universal credit for those aged under 22 who are care experienced, and recommended that care leavers be exempted. In its response, the Department said that “no decisions have been made yet” and that it would “consider consultation feedback before implementing any changes.” As the Government prepare to consider welfare reforms, I urge the Minister to make the strongest representations to his colleagues in the Department for Work and Pensions and the Treasury on this issue. It would make a huge difference. We are concerned by the Government’s refusal to commit to a number of our recommendations. We recommended that the Department implement the recommendation of the independent review of children’s social care to develop universal standards of care that apply to all children’s homes, including supported accommodation, ensuring that children in all settings receive care where they live. In its response, the Department stated: “Rather than prioritising development of a single universal set of standards, we are focusing on options for updating some of the most out-dated National Minimum Standards to ensure they reflect the latest ambitious goals we have for children and to bring them into better alignment with more recently developed standards.” I urge the Minister to look again at that recommendation, which would represent greater ambition for the quality of accommodation and support that children receive. The Committee recommended that the Department introduce national eligibility criteria for disabled children’s social care. The Department responded that it was waiting for the Law Commission’s recommendations on disabled children’s social care and would “set out any plans for reform in due course.” Whatever the outcome of the Law Commission’s work, it is vital that the postcode lottery currently experienced by families with a disabled child is addressed. We recommended that the Department take forward the recommendation of the independent review of children’s social care to introduce an opt-out model of independent advocacy for all children in care. In its response, the Department said that it would “introduce new National Standards for Advocacy for Children and Young People and revised statutory guidance on Providing Effective Advocacy for Children and Young People Making a Complaint under the Children Act 1989 in 2025.” I know that this topic is very close to the Minister’s heart. I urge him to go further than the response indicates and look at how access to independent advocacy can be maximised for all children in care. We welcome the Government’s commitment to family group decision making in relation to children on the edge of the care system, but we recommended that the Department clarify the specific model of family group decision making in statutory guidance to ensure that best practice is followed in all local authorities. In response, the Department said: “It is a local authority’s decision on which model of FGDM will best serve the families they support after considering the evidence.” I urge the Minister to look again at producing guidance for local authorities. Family group decision making is a very effective tool for driving better outcomes for children, but only if it is properly understood and rigorously implemented. There are risks in an approach that does not guarantee the quality of this work. Finally, the Committee recommended that the Department put in place a strategy for supporting children and young people at risk of extra-familial harm. The Department emphasised that it had strengthened the multi-agency response to extra-familial harm through updated statutory guidance. I encourage the Minister to pay further attention to this work. Extra-familial harm is a growing cause of children entering the care system, particularly as teenagers, and our evidence points to systems that are not joined up and are often ill-equipped to protect children from threats outside the home. Indeed, our evidence says that removing a child from their home can harm them further, rather than protecting them from the threats they are experiencing that do not come from within their family network. By intervening in the lives of children and families through children’s social care, the state exercises some of its gravest responsibilities. The stakes are very high and the consequences of failure can be catastrophic, but there are also huge rewards if we get things right. More families would be able to thrive together, and more children would be able to overcome adverse childhood experiences and thrive in education. Disabled children would be able to access education and opportunities on an equal footing with their peers. Even more importantly, the effectiveness of this work is fundamental if the Government are to meet some of their other challenges. If the Government are serious about tackling homelessness, or about tackling the intense crisis in the criminal justice system, they must also be serious about the outcomes for children in the care system. This work is of the utmost importance and my Committee supports the Government in their mission to break down the barriers to opportunity and to create a country in which every child can thrive.