Neil O'Brien MP: speeches

Speeches

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Can I press you on that one? I do not understand from the Bill how breakfast clubs are supposed to work. Obviously, many primary schools already offer a breakfast club, and they charge for it. If you are now supposed to offer 30 minutes and a free breakfast—I think the going rate will be 60p in the first wave—how does that work with schools’ current charging arrangements? Are they allowed to charge before that period, so there will be both charging and a free session? Is that your understanding of what the Bill does? Julie McCulloch: That is our understanding. Is that yours too, Paul? There will be the provision of additional funding for the children who most need it, but you can provide provision around that.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q The first question is for Dr Homden. You talked about some of the things in the Bill that you would like to see amended. I wonder whether you could expand on that, and particularly your point about the timeliness of intervention. Dr Homden: Particularly, we are concerned that some of the very sensible provisions in the Bill, such as breakfast clubs, are not extended to infants in the early years. There are a number of areas where early years extension would be appropriate, so while we recognise that this is a Bill on children’s wellbeing and schools, none the less the children’s wellbeing elements for the youngest children are particularly important—especially the opportunities for children to receive free meals, and also for the extension of admissions priority. The provisions for the extension of recognition of quality for teaching staff could and should be extended to early years workforce issues. The second key area is the fact that there are no provisions in relation to children’s access to advocacy—particularly 16 and 17-year-olds, those who are excluded from school, and those who face other forms of crisis in, for example, unregulated accommodation. While others will call for broader extensions of advocacy, these are the focus areas that we would recommend and commend to you as being the most effective ways to ensure that young people have the information they need to exercise decision making, and that they can hold the system to account.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Do you share, Dr Homden, the concern that we should be very clear that this should not delay decision making? Dr Homden: Absolutely.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Is a number of weeks a potentially dangerous thing? Jacky Tiotto: For very young children when you are concerned, if they are still with the parents, which is sometimes the case, or even with a foster carer, you want permanent decisions quickly. That does not negate the need for the family to be involved. You can have it much earlier because you have been worried for a while at that point.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q You can be a good teacher even if you do not have QTS. You can be the right person. Julie McCulloch: Yes. We absolutely in principle think that there should be qualified teacher status, but it is about that contextual piece. The third area where we have some concerns about the context is the extent to which there is capacity in local authorities—you have just heard from local authority colleagues—to pick up some of the additional requirements on them. Again, we do not have any concerns about the principle, but some of our members are concerned about whether there is that capacity, and whether that expertise still exists in local authorities.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q That is very helpful. Clause 18 provides for regulations to be made on agency workers and their pay. We would all like to spend less on all these different things, but even though we might be sympathetic to the ideas in the Bill, do you agree that if we just cap prices without taking action on supply, it will fail, because the underlying cause of the high prices has everything to do with supply and planning over time? Andy Smith: You have to cover both. It has been incredibly important and positive that the Government have taken forward measures to tackle the cost of agency workers. We are seeing the impact of the measures that have taken place already. For example, on Friday in my region we were talking about the implications and impact of the changes that have started to be implemented. We are seeing less churn of workers from one authority to another; we are also seeing some agency workers move over to the permanent books of councils, which is better for children. It is also important to ensure that we have a sufficient approach and strategy for the workforce generally. That covers all elements of the Bill, so it would include social work but also other professions and other agencies where we have particular challenges. Yes, we absolutely need to focus on the recruitment and retention of social workers as well as tackling the costs of agency workers. I believe that that is already under way and is making some impact.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Would you like to see resourcing clearly specified in this Bill? Ruth Stanier: You are absolutely right that the new burdens doctrine must be applied in the usual way. There are a number of measures in this Bill for which additional funding will be required, for example the new multi-agency units. We are encouraged that at this stage we are already having early discussions with the Department about the implementation arrangements. We are yet to undertake the full cost estimates, but that work will be set in train with the Department.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q What would that look like? Do you have to do a case review? Jacky Tiotto: As soon as that child becomes the subject of a concern, such that you might be making an application to deprive, you hold a child protection conference and you have a plan in place to protect that child beyond the deprivation, so including and beyond—it helps with the exit. The final point is about the type of people who apply to run this provision as amended: Ofsted needs to be really sure who they are and what their experience is. I have run this provision; I have worked in it. These kids are really needy. They need specialist, highly qualified people, and at the moment the provision that they get is not run by those sorts of people.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (First sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q What do you think the problem is that that measure is trying to solve? Julie McCulloch: In our view, it is right that there should be a core national entitlement curriculum for all children and young people; we think that is the right thing to do. The devil is in the detail—we are going through a curriculum review at the moment. Our view is that that entitlement is important—on the ground it might not make an enormous amount of difference, but it is still important.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q I just wondered whether we might get an answer during the passage of the Bill. I have a question for both of you. There was a thought-provoking leader in the TES the other morning that talked about the lack of discussion in the Bill, as well as more generally, on discipline. The Bill is largely silent on discipline, even though we know it is one the biggest issues affecting teachers, and Teacher Tapp surveys show that it is a huge issue for teachers and many students as well. Do you have particular thoughts on what you would like to see in the Bill, or more broadly, on discipline that would improve your ability to run orderly schools and protect teachers? There are obviously things out there like behaviour hubs, the discipline survey and questions about alternative provision. You both have very deep experience across the whole piece, so I am interested in your thoughts about what we could be doing further in the Bill and more generally. Nigel Genders: You are right to raise the issue of behaviour. When we talk to teachers across the country, one of the biggest things that puts people off teaching, in terms of the retention and recruitment crisis, is children’s behaviour. I am not sure there are particular things that you need legislation for in that space; it is about just giving teachers greater confidence. We are doing work in teacher training and leadership training to equip teachers to be really fantastic teachers, which are all important tools available to the system to really prioritise that area. I cannot think of anything particularly in the legislative space that would be needed. Paul Barber: I agree with Nigel that discipline is definitely a factor in the recruitment and retention of teachers, and it is something that we need to give some attention to. Like Nigel, I do not think there is anything specific that is required legislatively, but I think what is needed is an overall accountability framework within which schools have the flexibility to respond to the needs of their particular pupil populations. Our schools have a very good track record of being orderly, and I think that is one of the reasons why they are very popular with parents. It is about school leaders and professionals being able to do what is in the best interest of their pupils and enabling the behaviour to be what it should be in our schools.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q It was a point that David made in his evidence on it. I thought he made a good point. Catherine McKinnell: Obviously, we will listen to legitimate concerns on that. At the moment our view is that it is a much more proportionate way of dealing with a breach by an academy of a legal requirement within the legislation, so that we can avoid disruption to children where there is another way of dealing with it.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Would you say that the Bill, broadly speaking, erodes that kind of freedom and diversity in the system? That is at the moment, as drafted—it can change. Luke Sparkes: Certainly, around the areas that I have just described.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Thank you both for coming. My first question is to you, Paul. The last Government promised to lift the cap on faith school admissions and consulted on doing just that. Is that something you would still like to happen and potentially be put into the Bill? Paul Barber: The cap is a policy rather than law. We would very much like to see the cap lifted. My understanding of the current policy is that it applies to free schools, and we would very much like to see that lifted. The consultation took place and there has not, as yet, been a Government response to that.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Luke, you wrote a very interesting piece in the TES the other day about the importance of variety and difference between schools. You work in some exceptionally disadvantaged areas, turning around particularly difficult schools. I saw that you had used the academy freedoms to offer the nine-day fortnight so that teachers can have more preparation time, particularly because they are working in quite a demanding environment. How are you using those freedoms and how useful are they to you? Luke Sparkes: They are very useful when it comes to conditions. As Jon was saying, the narrative coming through about a floor and no ceiling is encouraging. I can see that working for pay, but I am not sure how that would work for conditions. My significant concerns with the Bill are about conditions. We have done more than most as a trust to try to position ourselves as a modern organisation. We know that post-millennials are not going to accept the norms that currently exist in our sector. We have also tried to overcome the rigidity of the job with innovations such as the nine-day fortnight. That innovation is starting to diffuse across the sector. We want to be even bolder. We are really starting to think about how we can totally re-imagine the school workforce. That is because most complex schools—the kind of schools that we lead—have become, in many ways, the fourth emergency service. That is by stealth and not by choice. We have had to address the scope and intensity of the job. I wanted to make that position clear. It is from that position and understanding that we still believe that a rigid set of expectations around conditions will stifle innovation—the kind of innovation that the three of us have led across our trusts. Leaders working in our context need the freedom to do things differently. That, of course, was the point of Labour’s academy policy in the first place. I accept that in some instances, it is possible to negotiate around standard conditions, but not everybody can do that. The innovations we are leading will not be scaleable if we are all forced to align to a set of rigid standards. It is also worth knowing that our most successful schools at Dixons—the ones that are getting the best results for disadvantaged students nationally—would have to fundamentally change as schools if they had to align to a set of rigid standards. That would be bound to impact negatively on outcomes for children, and not just academic outcomes. It would be a significant backward step. Finally, an interesting point is that our most innovative schools—the ones that are using their freedoms the most—actually have the highest staff engagement scores. These freedoms benefit and are attractive to staff.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q What do you think of the curtailment of academy freedoms in the Bill? It has now been published, so you have seen it, albeit that you were not talked to before. What do you think about the moves to scale back the academy programme, the end of academy orders, and LAs setting up new schools? If you were doing this, is that the direction you would want to go in? Dame Rachel de Souza: Look, I need the school system to be as ambitious for children—as Children’s Commissioner, I represent children—as they are for themselves. I had hoped that we would get to a point where we were not talking about old binaries—academies or council schools—but talking about schools, families of schools and building up our local authorities so that everyone can play their part to support standards in the post-lockdown period. I have two issues with the academies provisions. First, I cannot let children remain in failing schools, so if those are going, I need to know what is going to happen. Childhood lasts a very short time, so if a child is in a failing school, how will those schools be improved, immediately and effectively? Secondly, as well as a real vision for the schools system—I know that it is there—I would like to see what will happen to attainment data, under what is envisaged as replacing it, so that no child, particularly the most vulnerable, is disadvantaged. I was a headteacher for the first time in 2006. It was a Tony Blair-sponsored academy—I was his No. 67. That school had been failing for 20 years, and I got it to outstanding with the support of everyone around me. It has never gone back to less than good. Any new system has to deliver for the most vulnerable as well.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Are we still waiting to hear what that intervention regime will look like? Sir Martyn Oliver: Yes, but I think it is very imminent. I am very happy: I feel that we are going to hold the system to account to raise standards better than ever before.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Is the only amendment that we will be seeing from the Government on some of the issues we talked about today on pay, with nothing on clause 43, QTS or the national curriculum? If the answer is yes, and you are not planning an amendment on those, that is fine. I just wondered if the Minister had been persuaded by any of the things discussed, particularly around clause 43 and whether it is a bit too untrammelled in its current form and did not necessarily reflect the intent as put down in the notes? Catherine McKinnell: I can respond to the hon. Gentleman on the new power in clause 43 that he has raised a number of times today. It will provide the Secretary of State with a more proportionate and flexible remedy, where it is really important to address quite a narrow or specific breach regarding unreasonable behaviour within an academy trust. I can give you an example as to why this is necessary: at the moment existing intervention powers require the Department for Education to use a termination warning notice and subsequently a termination notice. That is not always necessary or appropriate when dealing with an isolated breach of a legal duty.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q That is a very interesting point. Do you have a sense yet of the future funding arrangements for breakfast clubs in secondary schools and for HAF—holiday activities and food? What is the current status of those, as you understand it? Kate Anstey: My understanding is that the HAF funding for holiday programmes has been committed to until 2025—some time this year. There are concerns about what will happen next with holiday programmes. In terms of funding for breakfast clubs more generally, there has been commitment to carry on funding the national school breakfast programme until 2026. That supports some secondary schools that meet the criteria. That is welcome, but one of our concerns with the work going on around breakfast clubs is funding and commitment to funding. We know that there is funding until 2026.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Do you have a timescale for when the Government are going on reply to that consultation? Paul Barber: I do not—that is not in my hands.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Can you unpack that a little bit? Lynn Perry: Yes, certainly. I will raise the third area and then I will come back to that, if I may. The third area is mechanisms for ensuring that the voices, wishes, feelings and experiences of children and young people really influence the provisions in the Bill, and to put those at the heart of support. On the single unique identifier, there are some questions that we think are worth some further scrutiny. The first of those is the question whether the single unique identifier would be assigned to all babies, children and young people, and a confirmation that that would be for children between the ages of nought and 18. We also think there is an opportunity to extend the use of the identifier, the scope of which is currently limited in the Bill to safeguarding and welfare purposes. A wider emphasis on wellbeing of children and young people and positive outcomes is one of the things that could be further considered here. As ever, implementation cannot wait, and it would be helpful to have some indicative timescales for when the Secretary of State might introduce regulations for the consistent identifier and how people will be required to use it within their systems. Finally, while acknowledging the need for data protection, there is an opportunity to make better, data-informed decisions in the future about the commissioning and scoping of services that will effectively meet the needs of children and young people, as well as taking account of some of their emerging vulnerabilities and risk and need factors.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Thank you; that is very helpful. I have a question for Rebecca. In Schools Week you wrote: “The schools bill working its way through Parliament…is not good legislation.” You described it as “micromanagement” and “stifling”. You talked about some of your experiences as a headteacher. Can you expand a bit on the overall vision and direction of travel? Rebecca Leek: Yes. I love being a headteacher—I was a headteacher yesterday, doing an assembly—but I have stood in both camps, and I have worked in very rapid turnaround situations with trusts.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Is there a major problem with schools employing teachers without qualified teacher status? Are non-QTS teachers not up to scratch? Would you regard it as a red flag if a school were employing non-QTS teachers? Would it make you think, “We’re probably heading towards a bad result here”? Sir Martyn Oliver: We do not actually look at the backgrounds of teachers and check to that level of detail, so I could not give you a quantitative answer. I do know that increasingly, as schools are finding it difficult to recruit and retain staff, they are looking at alternative measures. It is massively important that people be qualified to teach children to the highest possible standard in the specialism in which they are delivering.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Thank you for coming. I have some short questions that do not need particularly long answers. Have you found evidence that academy schools are not teaching a broad and balanced curriculum? Are you finding lots of academies not doing that? Sir Martyn Oliver: No, we do not find that.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Q Do you think it would be more attractive to extend those freedoms over both pay and conditions to local authority schools? David Thomas: I think it would absolutely work, as CST has suggested, to say that statutory teachers’ pay and conditions should be an advisory thing that schools and trusts need to have due regard of, and to continue with something like the School Teachers Review Body. As it is at the moment, they are effectively setting a default starting position from which people can innovate out if they want to, rather than capping what people are able to do.

• 21 Jan 2025 · Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Second sitting) · Hansard source

  More

  Could you answer the question? Catherine McKinnell: I will answer the question.