Russell Haggar

Site Owner

Labour and Education Policy large

  The following set of teaching notes covers Labour’s Education policies during the Premiership of Keir Starmer. The notes are rather long but there is a final shorter summary at the end of the notes. There is also the briefest of introductions to the Premiership of Andy Burnham, but I shall gradually provide further information on future education policy developments.

Meanwhile click here and here and  here for some tunes.

Click here for a Tutor2u revision activity on education policies. This item should provide useful background information to assist you with the consideration of current Labour Education Policy.

 

 

Labour and Education Policy

I started to write these teaching notes with the intention of updating them continuously as Labour’s education policies unfold throughout their term of office. In the event, on July 20^th 2026, Andy Burnham replaced Sir Keir Starmer as Prime Minister and initiated a significant Cabinet reshuffle which among other changes resulted in the appointment of Lucy Powell as Secretary of State for Education in place of Bridget Phillipson although Downing Street has stated that Ms Phillipson   “will remain a full member of cabinet as minister for women and equalities, reporting to the prime minister”  I have now subdivided  these notes into two sections on education policy 2024-2026 and education policy 2026.

 

Part One: Sir Keir Starmer and Bridget Phillipson 2024- 2026

 

 Introduction: The Economic Context

Education Spending in England

Ofsted

Schools and Mobile Phones and Social Media Ban for under 16's [Unfinished]

Labour and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026: Reform of Academies and much more

Free Schools

The Curriculum and Assessment Review

The Schools White Paper : Every Child Achieving and Thriving - February 23^rd 2026

Special Educational Needs and Disabilities [SEND]

Labour and Skills Policy

The Education and Skills White Paper

Apprenticeships

Youth Unemployment

Higher Education

Childcare and Nursery Education, Sure Start, Best Start Family Hubs.  School Uniforms. Breakfast Clubs. Free School Meals   and the Two Child Benefit Cap 

Private Schools

Labour and Education Policy: A Summary ****

Introduction

It was clear that whichever political party won the General Election of 2024 would inherit a difficult economic situation. Low economic growth since the great financial crash of 2007-2008 meant that revenues from taxation had stagnated even though, mainly due to the freezing of income tax thresholds the percentage of national income paid in taxation had actually increased. Due to increased cost of living pressures political parties wishing to secure election victory would be unlikely to propose major taxation increases because, quite simply, a party proposing significant tax increases would be very unlikely to win the General Election.

Meanwhile, however, pressures to increase government spending had increased for a variety of reasons. Increased life expectancy  and improved medical techniques  generated pressures for increased spending on health and social care; increasing population was leading to a growing housing shortage; government borrowing costs had increased significantly due to increased government borrowing at higher interest rates; the  welfare budget was increasing  because of an ageing population and because  an increasing proportion of  the working age population were not in employment , education and training ; spending on education in general and on children with SEND in particular was widely seen as inadequate ; and many argued that not enough money was being spent to alleviate poverty..

Also, Governments would be keen to retain tight borrowing limits because to do otherwise might undermine the confidence of the bond markets and lead to higher interest rates which would increase government borrowing costs even further.

 

In the General Election Manifestos of 2024 both Labour and Conservatives stated that they would not increase rates of income taxation and VAT and while Labour promised also that it would not increase the rate of national insurance contributions, the Conservatives claimed that they would actually reduce employee national insurance contributions.

For the Institute for Fiscal Studies these taxation proposals were not credible and the BBC reported the conclusions of the IFS as follows: 

'Trilemma'

Paul Johnson, director of the IFS, said: "These raw facts are largely ignored by the two main parties in their manifestos."

He said that "huge decisions over the size and shape of the state will need to be taken, that those decisions will, in all likelihood, mean either higher taxes or worse public services".

Whoever wins the election in less than a fortnight faces a "trilemma", said the IFS.

"Raise taxes by more than they have told us in their manifesto. Or implement cuts to some areas of spending. Or borrow more and be content for debt to rise for longer," it said.

"What will they choose? The manifestos have left us guessing."

Subsequently, while Labour argued that increases in employers’ national insurance contributions. Increases in the minimum wage, improved workers’ rights and removal of the two-child cap on the child benefit cap of Universal Credit were all desirable policy changes, critics argued that these policies would serve to reduce the low rate of economic growth still further. In the event there was some evidence of increased economic growth by the Spring of 2026, but growth then faltered again mainly because of increased conflict in the Middle East. The uncertain reliability of the USA and the war in the Ukraine had already prompted calls for increased defence  spending  which would be likely to result in result in spending reductions in other government departments  and /or further increases in taxation  and/or increased government borrowing  and when Labour’s planned increases in defence spending were seen as inadequate, this led to the resignation of Defence Secretary John Healy and other Defence Ministers. In these difficult financial circumstances, future education spending   may well be constrained with adverse consequences for Labour’s education policies which will present difficulties for the incoming Prime Minister Andy Burnham..

 

Trends in Education Spending 2025-26

Annual publications from the Institute for Fiscal Studies provide very detailed information on trends in education spending in England. You may find overviews of the IFS findings in the Executive Summary of this publication and in the related podcast  with  related slides. Here are some key points taken from the Executive Summary although you are advised to read the Executive summary for fuller explanation of these points.

• Early years spending per pupil has increased significantly.
• Primary school spending per pupil has increased steadily.
• Secondary school spending per pupil fell between 2010/1110 and 2019/20 but has increased in recent years but is still 3% below its 2010/11 level.
• However, over half of the increase in school funding for pupils aged 5-16 [ ie primary and secondary school spending] can be accounted for by increases in SEND funding which means that “mainstream school spending per pupil is currently about the same level it was in 2015/16 “
• Total school spending per pupil aged 5-18 in England fell by 10% between 2010/11 and 2019/20. However recent increases in spending mean that it has returned to its 2010/11 level.
• Spending on further education [16-18] per pupil has risen slightly in recent years but is still below its 2011/12 level
• Total spending on adult skills and apprenticeships increased by 7% between 2019/20 and 2035/26 but these increases are much smaller than previous cuts and total spending in 2025/26 will still be 25% lower than it was in 2010/11.
• Spending per pupil in Higher education has fallen significantly since 2010/11 but has been stable in the last two years.

 

 

Labour and Ofsted

Click here for Ofsted responsibilities. In these notes I shall consider Ofsted inspection of schools, but Ofsted is responsible also for inspecting a range of institutions as indicated in this excerpt.

Our responsibilities

We’re responsible for:

Inspecting

• maintained schools and academies, some independent schools, colleges, apprenticeship providers, prison education and many other educational institutions and programmes outside of higher education
• childcare, local authorities, adoption and fostering agencies, initial teacher training and teacher development

 

Click here and Scroll to Section Two Part Nine: Ofsted Inspections for some information on the work of Ofsted 1991- 2024

Supporters of Ofsted have claimed that its inspection regime has facilitated systematic school improvement  but it has also faced criticism from its very beginnings that its assessments of individual schools have been inaccurate , that it has failed  to allow for the difficulties faced by pupils and schools in socially disadvantaged areas, that its one of two word  summaries of school quality have failed to recognise  the variability of quality within individual schools and that its inspections have been unnecessarily combative  and stressful, especially perhaps for headteachers.

In November 2022 Caversham Primary School was downgraded from “outstanding” to “inadequate” because of Ofsted’s concerns that safeguarding issues were not being adequately addressed.  The tragic death of headteacher Ruth Perry in January 2023 following the Ofsted judgement was accompanied by increased criticism of the Ofsted regime. Teachers again complained of the mental and physical stress imposed on them by Ofsted inspections; the competence of Ofsted inspectors was called into question; the use of one- or two-word summary judgements was deemed inappropriate; and teachers unions called for the outright abolition of Ofsted.

Sir Martyn Oliver [who had also played a major role in the production of the Sewell Report on Race and Ethnic Disparities] replaced Amanda Spielman as Chief Ofsted Inspector in January 2024 and stated that significant changes would be made to the Ofsted inspections regime and in September 2024 the Labour Government announced that the one- or two-word summary judgements would be discontinued.

Click here and here for support for and criticism of the potential future decision to appoint Sir Martyn Oliver as new Head of Ofsted.

During 2025 Ofsted began work on the development of new criteria for the inspection of nurseries, schools and further education colleges and on the development of new, more detailed report cards [which would vary slightly as between different stages of education] to replace the original one- or two-word summary judgements.

However, fundamental criticisms of Ofsted remained and when Ofsted did provide details of the proposed new report cards, they too attracted considerable criticism from teachers’ unions and from individual teachers. Ofsted then produced new versions f the Report Cards combined with a consultation survey which was also criticised as vague, poorly worded and unlikely to facilitate further progress on the development of new report cards.

By May 2025 teachers’ unions were claiming that the new inspection schemes proposed would fail to reduce the stress levels associated with the original inspection scheme and that they would therefore seek a judicial review of the legality of the new inspection scheme. Then in June 2025 headteachers’ unions [the NAHT and the ASCL] wrote to Secretary of State Bridget Philipson and to Head of Ofsted Sir Martyn Oliver stating that they were considering encouraging their members to withdraw their services as Ofsted inspectors which could be expected to undermine the viability of the Ofsted Inspection scheme.

Be that as it may by September 2024, the unions’ case for a judicial review had been rejected and Ofsted stated it would go ahead with the now slightly revised Report Card system. The NAHT stated in response that they were considering an appeal against the courts’ decision to refuse judicial review and that they would consult their members about the possibility of industrial action, although yet no industrial action has ensued.

For further information on the new Ofsted inspection system  and some criticisms of it:

Click here for the changes made to Ofsted Reports Cards and to Core Inspection Areas in September 2025. [Schools Week] This article thus provides information of the Report Cards which are currently in place.

Click here and here for official descriptions of the Report Cards and the Ofsted inspection regime.

Click here for BBC coverage of the introduction of the new Ofsted inspection system and some criticisms of it.

Click here for very detailed coverage of Ofsted issues from the Schools Week Ofsted page. Click here for a very negative survey of headteachers and here for the greater likelihood of lower gradings for more inclusive schools

Click here for Select Committee discussion on Ofsted in which Sir Martyn Oliver defends the new inspection regime

 

 

Labour and ban on mobile phones in schools and social media ban for under 16's  [unfinished]

Click here for ban on mobile phones in schools and here and here for social media ban for under 16's

 

Labour and the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act 2026: Reform of Academies

 Considerable disputes continued around the organisation of Academies outside and inside Parliament during the passage of the Children’s Welfare and Education Bill in 2025 and 2026 Act which passed into law in April 2026 .

In Parliament the Conservatives claimed that Conservative education policies between 2010 and 2024 had been particularly successful as indicated  by the improving rankings of the English Education system in PISA tests; that this  improvement occurred as a result of the increased school autonomy made possible by the academisation programme;  and that the proposals  in Labour’s Bill would undermine teacher autonomy with negative consequences  for pupils’ educational achievement. These views attracted considerable support outside Parliament from supporters of academies among whom well known Headteacher Katherine Birbalsingh  received considerable publicity. Also  Click here and here  and here  for criticisms of the Bill by former Head of Ofsted Amanda Spielman.

Against this Labour stated that it was a Labour Government which had originally introduced academies; that Labour continued to support academies and that its reforms would improve academies’ performance without undermining teacher autonomy. Some support for Labour’s position was provided in the results of a survey published in the Guardian which showed that most school leaders denied that these Labour policies would reduce school autonomy. Click here for further Guardian coverage of the Bill from January 2025

 

The Act provided for the introduction of the following changes to the organisation of Academies. I rely here on a very useful article from Schools Week

• Prior to the passage of the Act, academies were not compelled to follow the National Curriculum although in practice many academies were not deviating significantly from the National Curriculum. However following the publication of the recent Curriculum and Assessment Review, Labour is intending to introduce a new, modified National Curriculum and has now mandated that all Academies must follow it.
• Prior to the Act, Academies were allowed to employ teachers who were not professionally qualified, but the Act mandated that Academies would now only be able to employ professionally qualified staff or those who are working toward a nationally recognised professional qualification. [With effect from September 1st 2027]
• It was initially proposed that all state school teachers , including those in Academies , would be subject to the same regulations on pay and conditions but as a result of a parliamentary amendment , it was agreed instead that academies would be allowed to pay teachers above the national rates  but would not be allowed to pay them below the national rates. Thus, there would be “a floor but not a ceiling.”

• Prior to the Act local authority-maintained schools judged by Ofsted to be requiring special measures or requiring significant improvement would be compelled to become an Academy but following the Act although the Government might still compel failing schools to become academies, many failing schools will receive help via new RISE teams while remaining under local authority control. Click here and here and here and here for RISE 

• It is intended that all schools should become members of School Trusts. Click here for some detailed information on the growth of multi-academy trusts.
• Prior to the ACT, all new schools opened had to be Free Schools but under the terms of the Act Local Councils will still have to invite proposals for planned free schools but may also submit plans for new local authority-maintained schools.
• Ofsted will now inspect Multi- Academy Trusts, and the Secretary of State will also have greater powers to regulate the activities of Multi-Academy Trusts.
•  Academies will now have to cooperate with local councils over admissions so that, for example, The schools adjudicator could prevent Academies from increasing their admissions if there are vacancies in local authority-maintained schools in the same area.
• As is indicated in the Schools Week article, the new Act also contains provisions for the extension of free school meal eligibility criteria, the introduction of breakfast clubs in all  primary schools and the capping of branded uniform items
• As is also indicated in the Schools Week article, the Act also contains a wide range of procedures designed to improve children’s safety

 

For further information

Click here for Kemi Badenoch’s criticisms of the Bill

Click here for view of a New Schools Network spokesperson [from the Times Educational Supplement]

Click here for IFS analysis of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools l Bill.

Click here  for a detailed Schools Week evaluation of criticisms of the Bill

Click here and  here for government summaries of the main provisions of the Act including its safeguarding provisions.

Click here for coverage of the social care elements of the Act [from The Institute or Government]

The Children’s Welfare and Schools Bill also contains measures to safeguard the welfare of children. These measures have been widely welcomed as is indicated in this Guardian article  but the Bill has also attracted criticism from some supporters of home schooling and some religious groups as representing excessive state control of education  and critics of the Bill launched a petition demanding that the bill be scrapped. This petition attracted sufficient public support to ensure a parliamentary debate.

Click here for protests against the Bill  and here for the Christian Institute and here for Education Otherwise and here for video coverage of the parliamentary debate.

Click here for criticisms of the safeguarding provisions from The Home Ed Daily

 

Free Schools

 The controversies over Free Schools continued as Labour came to power.  In August 2924 researchers from UCL published a report suggesting that the opening of primary free schools resulted in increased social segregation. You may also Click here for Guardian coverage of this report.

In October 2024, as reported in the Guardian, the Labour Government paused the opening of 44 new state schools which had been approved by the previous Conservative Government “using its “free school application process, introduced by Micheal Gove in 2010.”

You may  Click here for a House of Lords debate on Free Schools and Academies from July 2025.

In December 2025, the Labour Government announced that it intended to spend £3bn on up to 60,000 additional state school places for pupils with SEND and that of this £3bn,an estimated £600m would come from savings arising from the scrapping of new free schools which had been planned by the previous Conservative Government.

As mentioned above, Prior to the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act, all new schools opened had to be Free Schools but under the terms of the Act Local Councils will still have to invite proposals for planned free schools but may also submit plans for new local authority-maintained schools

Click here for The Guardian Free School Page

 

  Labour and the Review of Curriculum and Assessment 

Click here for Curriculum and Assessment Review Interim Report

Click here for the Curriculum and Assessment Review Final Report

In June 2024 the new Labour Government announced the setting up of a committee to produce a Curriculum and Assessment Review. The committee would be chaired by academic educationalist Professor Becky Francis and would take evidence from a wide variety of educationalists, employers, trade unions and universities and from school leaders, teachers, parents, carers, and pupils. The Committee produced an Interim Report on 18^th March 2025, and the final Report was published on November 5^th 2025. It was clear that the Report would have a major influence on government education policies proposed in Government White Papers in Schools, SEND and Education for 16–19-year-olds.

The Curriculum and Assessment Review Report is long and detailed with proposals for reform of the English National Curriculum, of individual subjects within the National Curriculum, and of aspects of education outside of the National Curriculum. Key proposals include the following.

It is recognised that parts of the existing National Curriculum are working well but that some changes are also necessary and that in particular a significant educational achievement gap continues to exist as between relatively advantaged and disadvantaged pupils ; that the needs of children with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities [SEND} are not being met; and that changes in the National Curriculum can help to address these relative disadvantages although it is also recognised that the causes of such disadvantages also lie to a considerable extent outside of the education system.

It is very important that all pupils should receive a good grounding in English. Mathematics, Science, Humanities subjects and Modern Languages .The Report therefore proposes that in Primary School English there should be less emphasis on the mechanics of English Grammar and more on the encouragement of both written English and oracy; that there should be new diagnostic tests in English and Mathematics in Year 8 to flag up problems which might inhibit pupil progress at Secondary  Level; that all pupils should be able to study Triple Sciences at GCSE Level;; and that new courses should be introduced designed to help students who have failed to pass GCSE English and/or Maths at level 4 or above to improve their standards in these subjects.

However, the Report also notes that the EBacc performance measure has restricted students’ option choices at GCSE Level, preventing them from studying Art, Music and Vocational Subjects and that therefore the EBacc performance measure should be discontinued. The Report does still recommend the continuance of the Progress 8 measure but in its response to the Report the Labour Government has stated that the existing Progress 8 measure is to be revised. Click here for further details on attainment 8 and progress 8 .

 

The Report recommends various changes to the curricula of individual GCSE subjects [see the full Report for details] and despite calls for the scrapping of GCSE Examinations, the Report supports their continuation but recommends also that amount of spent taking examinations could be reduced with no reduction in their effectiveness as means of assessment

For students aged 16-19 GCE, Advanced Levels and T Levels should continue but the should be supplemented by new vocational courses which the Report calls V Levels. The future introduction of new V Level courses was announced shortly before the Report was published and further information about them can be found here  and here.

While National Curriculum subjects remain crucially important, the Report emphasises that pupils should also have the opportunity to address issues which are inquiringly important in contemporary society. The Report suggests that Citizenship should be made mandatory in primary Schools and that all students should have ample opportunity to address important social issues such as climate change, financial literacy and media misinformation.

Click here for a brief government summary

Click here  and here  and here for very useful summaries

 Click here for the response from the Sutton Trust and  here for a detailed Research Brief from the House of Commons Library

Click here for discussion with Professor Becky Francis on Curriculum and assessment review and related matters

Click here for a Parliamentary Statement from Bridget Phhipson statement and subsequent debate

Very Importantly Click here for the Government’s Response to the Curriculum and Assessment Review

The Schools White Paper: Every Child Achieving and Thriving [February 23^rd 2026]

Click here for the full White Paper

The White Paper is long, detailed and difficult to summarise. In my own short summary, I have relied mainly on the Executive Summary of the White Paper itself and on  a House of Commons Library Research Briefing which you may consult for further details

The White Paper contains a range of targets for improvement in the overall schools system combined with proposals for the improvement in the organisation of education provision for students with special educational needs and disabilities. It is accompanied by a consultation on the SEND proposals entitled SEND reform: putting children and young people first. In this section of my notes, I shall consider only the proposals for overall school reform, and the SEND proposals are considered later in the notes.

The key targets for school improvement are specified in the following extract from the Executive Summary of the White Paper. It should be noted that these targets relater to GCSE performance and are to be achieved “by the time children born under this government” take their GCSE examinations i.e. by 2040. However, the White Paper also specifies a range of targets which are to be achieved by then end of this Parliament i.e. by 2028/9… presumably!

Extract One

When this generation finishes secondary school, it is our ambition that: • All children will be stretched to achieve higher standards. On average, across the system as a whole, children will leave school achieving a grade 5 or higher across their GCSE's. Every child will share in this improvement – from targeted support to help those furthest behind secure a pass, to ensuring that children who are progressing but capable of more are stretched to achieve the very top grades. • The disadvantage gap will be halved. Children from low-income backgrounds will achieve around a full grade higher in each of their GCSE's than is the case today. This equates to over 1.3 million grade improvements across the cohort, and over 30,000 more disadvantaged children passing English and maths at grade 4 or above each year. Ofqual is responsible for maintaining standards and public confidence. It will continue to use a range of evidence to ensure that grades keep their value over time. Where evidence, including from the National Reference Tests, indicates that there is an increase in children’s attainment, that evidence will be appropriately reflected in the grading of qualifications. Any increase in grades must reflect genuine increases in attainment. See technical annex on page 105 for more information on these targets.

Click here for the Disadvantage Gap explained Sutton Trust,

Extract Two

Change is underway – by the end of this Parliament, we will already see the impact: • Early years: A record proportion of children starting school ready to learn – 75% of 5-year-olds reaching a good level of development in the Early Years Foundation Stage.

16 • Key Stage 1: 90% of children meeting the expected standard in the Year 1 Phonics Screening Check.

17 • Key Stage 2: Outcomes will reach their highest level since current assessments began. This means around 25,000 more children leaving primary school with strong foundations for secondary, including over 10,000 disadvantaged children

. • Key Stage 4: Stronger progress for disadvantaged children and those starting secondary school below expected standards – a group that includes over three quarters of children identified with SEND at the end of Key Stage 2.

18 • Pupil belonging: More children – including those disadvantaged or with SEND – will feel a strong sense of belonging in school. Progress will be monitored through robust, ongoing national and international surveys. By 2029, we expect every school to monitor children’s sense of belonging and engagement, up from around 60% of schools today.

It is recognised in the White Paper that students’ potential educational progress is influenced heavily be factors external to the schools themselves including health and general family support and that it will therefore be necessary  to integrate family services, health services and the schools more effectively  for example via the Labour Governments new Best Start policies and via more effective mechanisms for school – family communication .

All individual schools will now be required to become members of multi-school trusts although the timescale for joining a trust has not yet been specified. Also, whereas in the past only academies could form multi- school trusts. the White Paper specifies that local authorities also will now be permitted to do so. It is hoped that membership of a multi-school trust will increase individual schools’ efficiency.

There will be reforms to the current Attainment 8 and Progress 8 measures and new progress measures for both low attainers and higher attainers achieving Grade 7 or above in English and Mathematics.

The new National Curriculum will help to improve examination results and broader educational objectives, and new frameworks will also be introduced for enrichment [ civic engagement, arts, nature, sport and life skills]. pupil engagement [belonging, safety and relationships] and behaviour and bullying. There is a recognition here that although examination results are important, it is important also to address other aspects of pupils’ school experience especially bearing in mind data from PISA reports and elsewhere that many UK pupils are currently unhappy  and disaffected at school.

 The funding of education will be reorganised in order to better address problems of social disadvantage. There will be changes to the national funding formula to compensate more effectively for geographical patterns of social disadvantage and  less reliance on eligibility for free school meals as the measure of  social disadvantage  which is used to assess eligibility for the pupil [premium and  plans to ensure that resources allocated to schools to address social disadvantage  are spent more effectively, [ Click here for House of Commons Library Report on The Pupil Premium pages 12-14 for further details.]

There will also be specific geographical initiatives to improve educational outcomes in the Northeast and in some coastal areas where substantial social deprivation and inequalities of educational attainment exist. These initiatives will draw on Labour’s London Challenge Programme which was introduced in 2003 and is said to have contributed to the improved effectiveness of London Schools.

The need to increase the quantity and quality of th teaching workforce is recognised. There are plans to employ 6500 new teachers mainly in areas of social deprivation, to retain more current teachers, to improve continual professional development and to introduce new mentoring and leadership programmes for head teachers.

Click here for the Sutton Trust response to the Schools Whitepaper reforms to support disadvantaged young people

Click here for The Sutton Trust on The Schools White Paper

Click here for The Guardian on the Schools White Paper

Click here for a Government Press Release and here for a TES article and here for a House of Commons Library Research Briefing on the for Schools White Paper

Click here for detailed summary of Schools White Paper from Schools Week.   

Click here for an early analysis from ffteducationdatalab which suggests that it will not be easy to reach the two attainment targets specified in the White Paper. The analysis concludes that:

“The overall increase in Attainment 8 targeted in the White Paper is of a similar size to the increase seen between 2019 and 2021, when TAGs were used to award grades instead of exams. Putting aside the question of whether this is actually possible in a world where KS4 results have largely tended to stay the same from year to year, it’s definitely a big challenge.

Bigger still is the challenge of increasing disadvantaged pupils’ attainment beyond levels seen in 2021. This will require all disadvantaged students to make considerable gains. But the biggest gains are likely to be needed among those with the lowest levels of attainment. Overcoming the diverse and complex barriers faced by this group in particular would therefore need to be a priority.”

Click here for BBC coverage of a recent Education Policy Institute Report. “Free school meal pupils falling further behind their peers, report warns.”

Click here and here for fall on school rolls which will create further financial difficulties for schools leading to many school closures if financial problems are not addressed.

Click here for The Independent Inquiry into White Working Class Educational Outcomes and here for the related website and  here and here   and here and here and  here  for media coverage of the Report. These sources suggest that it will not be easy for the Government to achieve its stated aims to reduce inequality of educational achievement. 

Click here for the White Working-Class Opportunity Index [Sutton Trust]

Special Educational Needs and Disabilities [SEND]

It was becoming increasingly clear that as numbers of students eligible for assistance for their Special Educational Needs and Disabilities increased overall funding and the quality of services available were inadequate and that reform of SEND provision would be essential for the incoming Labour Government. The Government promised a future Whitepaper on SEND but in the meantime, there were fears from parents that any new system might make matters worse rather than better. The main issues and difficulties associated with SEND are outlined in this separate document and immediately prior to its publication some discussion of the future Whitepaper is provided here [BBC] and here {Guardian]. 

Click here for the White Paper Every Child achieving and thriving The White Paper states the Labour Government’s intention to halve the disadvantage gap and establishes a range of targets against which progress will be measured. It then focuses especially on new measures which will be introduced to improve the delivery of education for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities.

 

 Click here for a summary of the SEND component of the White Paper from the House of Commons Library.

Click here for the Key Changes to SEND and here for further details and  here for potential difficulties from the BBC.

Click here and Click here and here and here and here for various items from the BBC on SEND

Click here for Sutton Trust information via a Guardian article indicating that top secondary schools are less likely than average t take SEND pupils

Click here for the Sutton Trust Response to the SEND Reforms

Click here for further information from The Sutton Trust via the Guardian on SEND

Click here and here and here and here for Guardian articles  and here for a Guardian podcast

Click here for detailed Schools Week summary of the White Paper SEND proposals.

Click here for ALLFIE and here for ALLFIE press release

Click here for recent data on increase in number of pupils receiving SEND support . [June 2026]

 

Labour and Skills Policy

 

Labour, T Levels, Other Level 3 Courses and Announcement of new V Level Courses

The Conservatives introduced T Levels for first teaching from 2020 but criticisms soon arose because the quality of some T level courses was soon called into question  and also  because plans to scrap 4000-5000 Level three courses included plans to scrap many BTec and OCR National courses which were popular, effective courses which among other things provided access to Higher Education for  students [ many of whom were from disadvantaged backgrounds] who were not following GCE Advanced Level courses.  

Click here  for an informative article on the current state of vocational education and specific concerns over the nature of Labour’s “short review”.

 Following the election of the new Labour government, Labour announced a short review of the planned scrapping of Level Three courses which included pausing the defunding of a limited number of level 3 qualifications that were due to lose their funding in August 2024. On 12 December 2024, the government announced the outcomes of its review and said 157 qualifications due to lose their funding will instead have it extended to allow reformed qualifications to be established and embedded in the system. Further details are provided in this Guardian article. Thus

“Education minister Janet Daby said the current post-16 education environment is “too confusing and fails to provide a clear route to success”, as too many courses, including BTecs and apprenticeships, overlap with T-levels.

More than 200 qualifications that had either no enrolments, or fewer than 100 per year over the last three years, will be cancelled from August 2025.

As part of the review, the Government will keep about 70% of vocational courses, including BTecs, which the previous Conservative administration had announced it would cut” Further details are provided in this article from Schools Week  and in this House of Commons Library Research Briefing

Earlier in December 2024 reforms were announced to the T Level placement system designed to increase take up and reduce drop out rates.

Click here for Ofqual call for reform of T levels Dec 2024

Labour would soon announce that Level three education Is to be changed significantly. GCE Advanced Level courses will remain, and the number of T level courses will increase but new V level courses will also be introduced from 2027, and these will gradually replace BTEC and other level three courses. At this point the precise details around the organisation of V Level courses were still uncertain but some further information would be provided in the Skills White Paper which is considered below.  

Click here for Skills Policy in England

The Labour Government showed its intention to improve the skills of the English workforce via organisational changes to the implementation of skills policy. Thus in 2024 Skills England was set up to replace The Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education and that 29 Technical Excellence colleges will be established in England. Time will tell whether this re-organisation will be successful.

In 1999 the then Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair had announced a target that 50% of English young people should attend university but by 2020 the then Conservative Education Secretary Gavin Williamson stated that the target would be scrapped because it had served to prioritise Higher Education at the expense of vocational education and had encouraged some young people to embark on some university courses which were unlikely to improve their employability which could have been increased if they had instead enrolled on vocational courses which would also have increased the efficiency of the UK economy.

Perhaps it was not entirely surprising  when a similar approach to Skills policy was taken by Labour Prime Minister Keir Starmer  who announced in September 2025 that he also believed that the 50% HE target was no longer appropriate and that it would be replaced by a target for 2/3 of English 25 year olds to enrol on university courses, further education courses and apprenticeships. Click here and  Click here   for further information on new university, further education and apprenticeship targets.

This policy, it was hoped would serve to improve the technical skills of the work force and thus improve economic efficiency. Central to this policy would by the expansion of Further Education [ for example via the building of new colleges and the development of new high quality technical courses which could be taken from home.

These initiatives have been welcomed although it has also been pointed out that the perceived relatively high status of higher education relative to vocational education might mean that many young people might still be unwilling to opt for technical courses provided by further education courses and that it would also be necessary to address the historic under funding of the Further Education Sector  Click here for further discussion of these points

The Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper December 10^th, 2025

 Click here for The Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper 10^th December 2025

Click here for the House of Commons Library summary of the Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper

Click here for an analysis of the Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper [from the IFS ]

Click here for the Guardian view on the Skills White Paper.

Further detailed changes to education and skills policy were announced in the Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper which emphasised the necessity to improve courses at all levels from One to Five as well as the need to reform some elements of the Higher Education system. Key policy initiatives in the White Paper are summarised below although students requiring to detailed information should follow the above three links.

The White Paper reiterates the already announced target for 2/3 of young people to be participating in higher level learning by the age of 25

It is recognised that many young people who are NEET are often in that situation because of their limited skills particularly in English and Mathematics. In the past all pupils in education who have failed to achieve Grade 4 or above in English and Mathematics have been forced to resit GCSE examinations in English and Mathematics yet the  the failure rate among resitting students has been very  high as indicated here and failure to pass these examinations meant that students will be ineligible for entry to higher level courses.

 

  DFE policy was modified in the course of 2025 so that students were no longer forced to resit but the approach to teaching resitting students has been widely viewed as unsatisfactory and a new approach has been signalled in the white paper. New courses will be developed which will prepare students with the lowest GCSE grades to enter resit courses when they feel ready to do so while only pupils with slightly higher grades will proceed directly to resit courses.

It is noted also that many students who have attained some level two qualifications have nevertheless experienced some difficulty either in finding employment or in accessing Level Three courses. Consequently, the White Paper proposes new courses which will help to provide pathways either into employment or into further study in level three courses.  

Level three education Is to be changed significantly. GCE Advanced Level courses will remain, and the number of T level courses will increase, and it is reiterated that new V level courses will also be introduced from 2027 and these will gradually replace BTEC and other level three courses. The precise details around the organisation of V Level courses are as yet uncertain but some additional information can be found via the following links.  

Click here for New V Levels and post 16 qualifications explained 

Click here  and  Click here  and  here for some additional information on V Level courses. Click here for the announcement of the timeline for the introduction of V Levels beginning with Education, Finance and Digital V Levels from 2027.

The Further Education sector will have a considerable role to play in the delivery of Level One, Two and Three courses but Labour hopes also  to improve the provision of level 4 and 5 courses to respond to the skill shortages which exist as this higher technical level and this increased provision of such courses  implies that the scope of further education is to be expanded significantly. The White Paper emphasised that increased funding would be made available for the Further Education Sector and that it is intended to increase the recruitment of effective teachers, the availability of continued professional development and the retention rate of Further Education teachers.

Labour had announced in opposition that if elected it would introduce technical excellence colleges and prior to the White Paper Labour announced that some colleges which were providing excellent courses in the government’s growth priority sectors would be designated Technical Excellence Colleges and receive additional government funding to provide these courses. 10 Technical Excellence Colleges in the area of construction were announced in June 2025, and it was also announced that selection of more colleges would begin at the end of 2025 in the areas of defence, advanced manufacturing, clean energy and digital.  Click here and here for some further information

The White Paper also addresses Higher Education issues

The Government intends to strengthen the connections between Higher and Further Education sectors in the provision of higher-level technical courses’

It intends to increase the financial stability of the Higher Education Sector by ensuring that in future undergraduate tuition fee caps will be increased in line with inflation, conditional on providers’ quality ratings. Maintenance loans are to be increased in line with inflation and new means tested grants are to be introduced for students on priority courses, financed by a new levy on international student fees.  However, it is as yet unclear which courses will attract maintenance grants and University spokespersons have stated that the levy on international student fees may well affect university finances adversely.

The overall research strategy of the Higher Education sector is to be streamlined to ensure that “curiosity driven research” is protected and promoted but that university research will also be linked effectively to the needs of the economy. Further information on Higher Education is provided below

 

The House of Commons Library Research Briefing provides a very useful summary of comments and reactions to this White Paper.

Click here for and IFS item on Further education and sixth forms stating that “Recent funding increases for further education reverse some but not all of the real terms decline experienced during the 2010s.”

Youth Unemployment

Click here for Neets and  here for recent UK unemployment data and here for youth unemployment trends as of MAY June 2026.  Click here for the Guardian Unemployment Page [Many articles and regularly updated]

Click here and here for Labour and the youth minimum wage.

Click here for trends in UK unemployment. The youth unemployment rate is much higher than the overall UK rate and there are also significant regional disparities in both overall unemployment and youth unemployment. [Unemployment data must, however, be interpreted with care. If individuals who are not looking for work decide to sign on as unemployed, this rise in unemployed could be seen as a positive development and it is also possible that the rate of employment and the rate of unemployment can rise simultaneously.]

The causes of high UK unemployment are to be found in developments in the world economy, the increased use of AI and the sluggish long term economic growth rate of the UK economy. However, it has been widely claimed also that UK unemployment is rising because of the increased minimum wage and the rise in employers’ national insurance contributions and that these factors have impacted especially adversely on the job prospects of young people, including those young people who have recently graduated with good degrees. It has been argued that in the past increases in the minimum wage have not resulted in increased unemployment, but this may have ben because past rates oof Uk economic growth have been higher but in the current low economic growth climate increased minimum wages combined with increased employer national insurance contributions are more likely to increase unemployment.

The analyses of the impacts of increases in employers’ national insurance contributions and increases in the minimum wage on unemployment ate complex.

Click here for a basic explanation of Employer’s national insurance contributions

Click here for IFS analysis of the recent fall in youth employment

Click here  for an advice submission from the Low Pay Commission on 2026 minimum wage rates

Click here for a House o Commons Research Briefing on the Youth Guarantee [May 2026] which outlines the various measures which the Labour Government has introduced in order to improve youth employment prospects

 Former Labour Health Secretary Alan Milburn was appointed in November 2025 to head a government inquiry of young people not in employment, education or training. It is, of course, to be hoped that Mr Milburn’s inquiry will be successful but unfortunately the problem of limited employment prospects for many young people will not be easy to solve.

Click here for an article by LSE Professor Alan Manning “Reducing the youth minimum wage would be a mistake.”

Click here for latest policies designed to reduce youth unemployment [ [16/3 2026]

Click here for modification to vocational education This in New Folder 4What to do here?

The Alan Milburn Report May 28^th 2026

Click here for NEETS [BBC May 28^th, 2026]

Click here for Why has the NEET rate risen? [IFS 19^th May 2026

Click here for Alan Milburn speech and here  for the report. Chapter 4 is on the Education system

Click here for Guardian summary

 

Apprenticeships

Vocational education is provided also by means of Apprenticeships which may involve a combination of on-the-job training and college attendance leading to a recognised qualification.

Apprenticeships were for many years associated primarily with the skilled manual trades such as plumbing, engineering and building but nowadays the main sectors providing apprenticeships are Business, Administration and Law, Engineering and Manufacture, Health Public Services and Care and Retail and Commercial Enterprises. Click here for a little historical information on Apprenticeships

Consequently, there are now more female than male apprentices and there are significant gender differences in the choice of apprenticeships in different sectors.

Apprenticeships may currently be undertaken at 4 levels: Intermediate, Advanced and Higher equivalent to GCSE Level, Advanced Level, Higher and Degree Levels as is indicated here and  here

Click here for How are apprenticeships funded also covers some recent changes to policy

 

 

Name	LEVEL	Equivalent educational Level
Intermediate	2	5GCSE passes at Grades 9-4
Advanced	3	2 A Level passes
Higher	4,5, 6,7	Foundation degree and above
Degree	6,7	Batchelor’s or master’s degree

 

 

 

 Click here  for the House of Commons Library Research Briefing Apprenticeship statistics for England [December 2025] and  Click here for detailed data on duration, starts by level, age, length of employment [March 2026]

However, it is important to note that Foundation Apprenticeships were introduced in May 2025. They are designed for 16–21-year-olds and also for 22–24-year-olds who are care leavers or prisoners or prison leavers or have an ECHP.  They are explained in detail here but essentially are designed to introduce young people to employment in particular industries after which there may be opportunities for progression to intermediate level apprenticeships

 Following the introduction of the Apprenticeship Levy in 2017/18, the number of annual Apprenticeships starts fell and this fall was exacerbated by the effects of the COVID Pandemic. . 354,000 people began apprenticeships in 2024/25

Between 2017/18 and 2024/25 there has been a decline in the number of apprenticeships starts by those under 19 and between 19 and 25 and an increase in the number of apprenticeships starts by those over 25.  This is reflected in a significant reduction in apprenticeship starts at intermediate level and a significant rise in apprenticeship starts at Higher Level. Changes in starts at Advanced level have been smaller

“The proportion of women beginning apprenticeships has generally been between 50% and 55% since 2010”. “The proportion of learners having a learning difficulty or disability beginning an apprenticeship has increased from 11.2% in 2017/18 to 16.2% in 2024/5. The proportion of learners from minority ethnic backgrounds beginning apprenticeships has increased from 12.8% in 2016/17 to 19.2% in 2024/25.” [ House of Commons Library Research Briefing Apprenticeship statistics for England [December 2025.]

Apprenticeship starts are most likely in Business, Administration and Law, Health Public Services and Care, Engineering and Manufacturing technologies and Digital Technology

Click here for relaxation of the rules relating to Maths and English content of apprenticeships for over 19-year-olds. [BBC February 2025]

 Click here for government plans to scrap funding for postgraduate apprenticeships for over 21-year-olds [BBC May 2025]

The minimum duration of apprenticeships was reduced from 12 months to 8 months effective from August 2025 and is set to be reduced further  

Click here for Apprenticeship Units which are “short government funded training modules that teach practical skills in a single focused area.”  Further information can be found in the Post 16 Education and Skills White paper about 25% into this document

Click here for government plans to create 50,000 new youth apprenticeships in next three years [BBC December 2025]

Although some apprenticeship schemes are very effective. several criticisms have been made of other schemes in recent years. Some of these criticisms are outlined in the final section of this BBC article.  [Updated December 2025]

Click here for good critical summary

Apprenticeship Policy in England is covered in detail in this House of Commons Library Research Briefing

Labour and Higher Education 2024—

University tuition fees have been frozen in real terms since 2016 under the previous Conservative Government and this encourages universities to rely increasingly on the recruitment of foreign students who could be charged much higher fees. However, many universities have nevertheless faced difficult financial circumstances which has resulted in staff redundancies, course closures and fears of possible university closures.

Meanwhile it is pointed out that British universities in some cases rely on foreign recruiters who in order to earn their recruitment fees might well overstate the future job prospects arising from enrolling on some courses which might leave international students completing these courses with substantial debts which will be very difficult to repay.. Click here for further discussion of this issue,

The Labour Government which came to power following the UK General Election of 2024 responded by announcing in November 2024 that tuition fees would be increased for academic year 2025-6 in in line with inflation as measured by the RPIX measure which meant that they would rise by 3.1% from £9, 250 to £9535 per year. Maintenance loans are means tested and would also be raised in line with the RPIX [ with maximum possible maintenance loans rising from £10, 227 to £10,544 for students living away from parents outside London and from £13348 to £13, 372 inside London.  Remember that at this time no student grants were available to meet tuition fees or maintenance costs. Maintenance grants were scrapped in 2016.

Click here for details of the November 2024 announcement. This item indicates also that tuition fees in the past have failed to keep pace with inflation which has undermined universities’ finances and that maintenance loans has failed to keep pace with inflation which has increased students’ financial difficulties and forced many students to take paid work which may well have affected their studies adversely. Click here for further information from the Guardian. Click here for BBC items titled “University cash crisis to get worse despite tuition fee rise, BBC told” and “Four in 10 universities face financial challenges.”

 Click here for good data on HE deficits and for a universities merger.

Click here for possibility of university closures

In September 2025 it was announced that maintenance grants would return for some University students in England by 2029.

Click here for a BBC item which notes that the grants would be available to students from low-income households and targeting students studying priority courses. The grant would be financed by “ a tax on international student fees.”

Click here for a BBC item providing additional information on student living costs, and different student financial support in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland and variation in graduate earnings depending upon subject studied,

In October 2025, it was announced that tuition fees and maintenance loans would rise in line with inflation for the next two years and that legislation would subsequently be enacted to ensure that tuition fees and maintenance loans would automatically rise in line with inflation in the future.  Click here for the announcement that tuition fees and maintenance loans would both rise in line with inflation, 2026/8 and in future years.

The Labour Government has clearly tried to address the financial difficulties of universities and of university students. However, University leaders have argued that even though the increase in tuition fees is welcome, they have also been affected adversely by increases in the minimum wage and by increases in employers’’ national insurance contributions and that financing new student maintenance grants via a tax on international student fees will affect the universities’ finances adversely if it discourages international students from choosing to study in England..

Meanwhile it is possible that the increase in tuition fees will deter some students from entering HE ; that the increase in maintenance loans will simply increase student debt and that the introduction of new  student maintenance loans  will not do much to reduce overall student debt even for the students who actually receive the grants and that many students will not receive the grants in any case.

There are ongoing problems for students because due to the high interest rates being charged on student loans many students are finding that although they are spending considerable amounts of money repaying their student loans the high interest costs mean that their debts are actually increasing

Click here  and Click here for Click here for loan repayment difficulties

Click here   and  Click here  and Click here  for graduate employment and unemployment

 

Click here for IFS on Student Loans [detailed]

Click here for Student loan statistics [House of Commons Library]

Click here for planned Student Loan Inquiry [March 2026]

Click here and here for the capping of interest rates on some student loans [April 2026]

 

Ongoing inequalities of educational opportunity will remain because while affluent students are more likely to be able to concentrate full time on their studies, poorer students may be forced into long hours of paid work in order to support themselves given the inadequacy of maintenance loans and [if available] maintenance grants.

Click here for Sam Freedman on Universities

Click here for The Briefing Room on University troubles[ 2024]

Click here for graduate unemployment and here for a university merger and good data on HE deficits.

 

  Childcare and Nursery Education, Sure Start, Best Start Family Hubs.  School Uniforms. Breakfast Clubs. Free School Meals   and the Two Child Benefit Cap

Click here and here and here and here and here and here and here for recent poverty data

Childcare and Nursery Education

Click here for very detailed IFS analysis and Click here for IFS podcast: Are the kids alright: Early Years. Click here for Guardian childcare page

 

  

Government expenditure on childcare has increased very significantly in the last 20 years and in particular the Conservative Government announced plans in 2023 for a major expansion which the incoming Labour Government implemented during 2024 and 2025. 

  Click here for detailed statistics on the growth of government spending on childcare. The current system involves the following elements.

Some additional financial assistance with childcare costs for disadvantaged families and for students is available via the welfare state benefits system. This is indicated in a diagram here

Also note that the childcare entitlements are for term time only which amounts to 39 weeks of the year and that working parents 21 or over are eligible for the entitlements only if they are earning more than ££10, 574.72 per year and less than £ 100,000 pa. [The lower rates are slightly lower for Parents under that are of 21. Click here for further details

Since 2001/2 all 3- and 4-year-olds have been eligible for 15 hours of free childcare.

From 2013/14 disadvantaged children aged 2 have been entitled to 15 hours per week of free childcare.

 From 2017/18 children aged 3-4 in working families have been entitled to a further 15 hours of free childcare per week.

From 2024 children of working families aged 9 months 2-years have become eligible for 15 hours of free childcare per week.

Currently, therefore all children of working families aged 9 months to 4 years are eligible for 30 hours per week of free childcare.

Children of non-working families aged 3-4 are eligible for 15 hours of free childcare per week.

Disadvantaged 2-year-olds are eligible for 15 hours of free childcare per week

Clearly, therefore children in working families are eligible for more free childcare than children in non-working families. Click here for a Guardian article and Click here   for information from CORAM which address this point.

 

There have been several significant problems with the provision of childcare.

• It is argued that increasingly childcare policy has prioritised the entry of more parents [especially mothers] into the labour market and that less emphasis has been given to the need to improve child development prospects for children of all social backgrounds including the children of non-working parents.
• It can be shown that in the last 20 years the proportion of total childcare expenditure accruing to disadvantage children has fallen and it is highly likely that this will undermine the Labour Governments new target for 75% of 5-year-olds to reach a good level of development by 2028. In 2024/5, 68.7% of 5-year-olds reached a good level of development but it is notable that   5% of children ineligible for free school reached this target whereas only 51.3% of children eligible for free school meals did so. Since relatively disadvantaged pupils are less likely than advantaged pupils to access childcare, this is clearly likely to reduce their chances of reaching the good level of development threshold which may well [although not inevitably] have adverse consequences for their future educational progress.  This issue is discussed in some considerable detail in this IFS podcast  and students may link this discussion with research carried out by Professor Leon Feinstein in 2003 which indicated that early years development has a major impact on educational outcomes in later life.
• Since a large proportion of childcare is provided by profit- making private companies, childcare provision is wider in more affluent areas where affluent parents have been best able to afford it. Now that more free childcare is potentially available, it may still take some time before actual provision increases in less affluent areas.
• Although Labour is seeking to extend free childcare facilities significantly, it is argued that the money which they are providing for childcare is insufficient to meet risings costs which are rising especially because of the recent increase in the minimum wage and the increase in employers’ national insurance contributions.
• It is argued that the quality of staff providing childcare is variable and sometimes below the standard required but shortage of money may make it difficult to pay higher wages to attract more and better qualified staff.
• There are widespread concerns that in some nurseries children’s safety may be at risk and very sadly there have been harrowing cases where young children have died as a result of inappropriate practices by care workers. There are now calls for the compulsory introduction of CCTV cameras in all nurseries and the Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson has recently announced that there are to be a further 3000 unannounced inspections of nurseries per year. You may click here for further information although please be aware that this BBC article comes with a warning that “This story contains distressing content.”

Childcare providers are allowed to make additional charges for meals trips nappies and sun blocking creams, but it is claimed that these additional costs may make childcare unaffordable for less affluent parents. The Government is taking some action to alleviate these problems. Click here for government lans to investigate the hidden costs of childcare.

The take up of increased free childcare has actually been faster than the Labour Government expected which at least shows that this initiative has been popular, but it will also mean that the government will have to find more money than expected to finance the scheme which may be difficult in the current difficult financial circumstances. Click here for further information on this point. {The Independent].

• One Labour initiative is to increase the number of nurseries in primary schools via the conversion of classrooms into nurseries which will be possible as a result of the predicted fall in the primary school pupil numbers. However, it is estimated that this development will raise the proportion of total childcare places within primary schools from about 22% to about 27% which is helpful but unable to reduce the overall shortage of places significantly.

For further information

Click here for Nursery Education: dangers of increasing prices for unfunded hours [BBC]

Click here for existence of childcare deserts [BBC}

Click here for the increasing involvement of private equity firms in the running of public services including childcare

Click here for Paying for childcare in England [House of Commons May 2025]

Click here for Early Years Funding in England [ House of Commons July 2025]

Click here for limited entitlements for disadvantaged children [CORAM]

Click here for problems for poor families [NSPCC report]

Click here for Nursery education

Click here for discussion of problems with funded childcare

 

Sure Start and Best Start Family Hubs

Click here for more information on Sure Start Centres prior to 2024

Click here and here  and here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here for articles on Sure Start Centres

The Labour Government [1997-2010] had introduced Sure Start Centres in 1998 to provide integrated family support with parenting skills, children’s health and early years education initially in socially disadvantaged areas but eventually throughout the country. Early evaluations of the scheme were generally positive although there were concerns that in some areas middle class families made more use of the centres than did working class parents. However, a report by the IFS in 2021 pointed to the children’s health benefits of the centres while a further IFS report in 2024 pointed to the considerable educational benefits of the centres.

Thus, the Report compares the outcomes of pupils who lived near Sure Start Centres and therefore potentially had access to them with the outcomes of pupils who did not  and concludes that pupils living near the centres performed up to three GCSE grades better than those living further away.   The researchers also estimate that the benefits of using Sure Start Centres may have been as much as three times as large as the average impact on all children in the area but that there is some uncertainty in these estimates due to data limitations.

Notice also that perhaps unsurprisingly there are political disputes as to the effective of the Sure Start Programme relative to the support systems that are currently available [as indicated in the BBC coverage of the IFS research.]

Click here and Here and here for coverage of the 2024 IFS Research on the Sure Start Programme. The Report is technically complex, but students may find the 2-page Executive Summary with key findings useful

Click here for BBC coverage and here  and here for Guardian coverage of the IFS Sure Start research,

 

 Meanwhile, however, Labour politicians, welfare charities and some academics had been critical of the Conservative-Liberal Democrat Coalition Government [2010-15] and Conservative Governments [2015-24]   which closed many Sure Start centres.  However , these governments claimed that in many cases smaller centres had in fact been amalgamated into larger ones ad that they were actually improving the delivery of Family services   and that in any case in 2021 Rishi Sunak, the then Conservative Chancellor announced that new Family hubs would be set up to improve family services and in 2024 “  the Conservative government under Rishi Sunak rolled out 400 new "family hubs" offering a wider range of services across 75 local authorities” as reported by BBC News. However a report in 2025  by the Barnardo’s charity  pointed out that not only had the number of centres declined but that spending on such centres had de4clined significantly between 2010/11 and 2023/24 and that provision of family services remained totally inadequate. You may find information on the history of Sure Start Centres here

Labour was returned to government in July 2024 and in July 2025 announced that that new Best Start Family Hubs would be established which would replicate some of the benefits of Sure Start centres. Contrastingly the Conservatives claimed that there would be no significant differences between Labours Best Start Centres and the Family Hubs which the Conservatives had introduced from 2022 onwards.

For a flavour of the political debate as reported by the BBC:

Phillipson said: "It's the driving mission of this government to break the link between a child's background and what they go on to achieve - our new 'Best Start' family hubs will put the first building blocks of better life chances in place for more children."

Shadow education secretary Laura Trott said the lack of clarity about what was actually new was "part of a wider pattern".

"This is a government defined by broken promises and endless U-turns," she added.

 

For further information on Best Start Family Hubs

Click here [BBC] and here and here  and here   [Guardian] and  here  [IFS]

Click here and here and here and here for Government publications

 

School Uniforms

The Children’s Welfare and Schools Bill seeks to impose “ A limit of three branded items of school uniform required by primary schools, and four items at secondary if a tie is branded. This includes PE kit and applies to after-school activities. Schools can still offer “optional” branded uniform items.” [Schools Week]

Click here for Guardian coverage of government estimates that these proposals can save parents more than £50 per child and here for Ms Katherine Birbalsingh’s perspective on  the issue.[I suspect that this may not be her favourite song. Sorry!!]

 

Breakfast Clubs

 Click here and here and here    for BBC coverage of Breakfast clubs

Click here for IFS  analysis of Breakfast clubs                                   

Click here for a flavour of Parliamentary debate on Breakfast Clubs

  On February 24^th, 2025, the UK Government announced a pilot scheme involving the rollout of free breakfast clubs in 750 English primary schools  beginning in April 2025  Over one third of the schools in the pilot scheme will be located in deprived areas and it is intended  to begin a national roll out to all English primary schools in April 2026.

 It is argued that this would reduce food costs and before school childcare costs for some parents and enable children who might otherwise not eat breakfast at home to learn more effectively and thus contribute to increased equality of educational opportunity. The amount of money saved by parents as a result of free children’s breakfasts would be relatively  small  but it was claimed that some parents who were currently paying for before school childcare  might save as much as £450 per year although it was admitted that parents in  general were more likely to pay for after school childcare and holiday child care than for before breakfast child care .

Under the terms of the pilot scheme, pupils enrolled in the breakfast clubs would receive 30 minutes of free before-school childcare and opportunities to socialise and play games as well as a free breakfast. Schools were to receive £500 in start-up costs and £1099 to meet the costs of supervision and then to receive payments in arrears to meet the costs of the individual breakfasts.

However, it was estimated that schools would actually receive only 60P per pupil’s breakfast to cover breakfast costs and that even if this might just cover breakfast costs, it would not cover related childcare costs so that the scheme was likely draw money away from other parts of the school budget. This led teachers’ unions and some headteachers to state that as currently organised and financed, it was unaffordable for schools if they wished to protect other parts of school budgets. Consequently, , as indicated in this Guardian article, several schools chosen as early adopters of the pilot scheme stated that they would not participate in the scheme for financial reasons.. Also, educational charities such as Magic Breakfasts said that schools should also be able to provide breakfasts during the first teaching lesson which would save the costs of before school childcare although this would mean also mean that parents would have no opportunity to save on before school childcare costs.

It was noted also that the benefits of a free breakfast would be limited for the many relatively poor pupils who were not currently eligible for free school lunches, although, as indicated below, it would not be long before Labour would also introduce plans to widen eligibility for free school meals,

Following the above criticisms of limited funds the scheme, the Government did announce in November 2025 that increased funding would be made available. Hopefully this increase in funding will be adequate to the task.

Fairly brief information on the new funding levels may be found by clicking here and then on the link to Funding.

 

 

Free School Meals

Click here  and scroll down to section on Free School meal Eligibility in England. The data indicate that the percentage of pupils known to be eligible for free school meals has risen from 14% in 2015/16 to 25.7 % in January 2025. representing almost 2,2 million pupils.

In June 2025, the Labour Government   announced a change to the FSM eligibility criteria thereby removing the restriction that recipients of Universal Credit would be eligible for free school meals only if recipients’ household incomes are less than £7400 p.a. [after tax and not including any benefits,] Thus, as from September 2026, all children in households receiving Universal Credit would now be eligible for Free School  Meals.

The Government estimated that because of this change in eligibility criteria an additional 500, 000 children would now become eligible for Free School Meals , parents would be saved £500 per child per year and that 100,000 children would as a result be lifted out of poverty,

Also, very importantly the Secretary of State for Education Bridget Phillipson also confirmed that the Government were considering scrapping the two-child benefit cap.

For the Institute for Fiscal Studies associate director Christine Farquason stated that in the long term 1.7 million children would get free school lunches and that 100.000 children would be lifted out of poverty but that” today’s announcement will not see anything like 100, 000 children lifted out of poverty next year.”.

For further details  Click here for BBC coverage, Click here for Guardian coverage and click here IFS. coverage.

Click here for this item from the BBC which indicates that here have also been uncertainties surrounding the funding of Free School meals. Thus, in April 2025, the Government indicated that Government payments to school per free school meal provided would be increased from £2.58 to £2.61 per meal provided in the next academic year. However It has been estimated that the real cost of delivering a free school meal may be around £3.45 and that schools are being forced to meet the financial shortfall in FSM funding from the rest of their school budgets, It is suggested further that the companies are being forced to economise on food content and size of portions to keep costs down, all of which suggests that not all is well with school meal provision.

There is also evidence of a lack of take up of free school meals which means that many pupils who are eligible for free school meals and this is leading to demands for auto- enrolment of pupils eligible for free school meals as indicated here.

Click here for  a recent [January 2026] article from Schools Week  which indicates that the Government’s intention to increase the funding of Free School meals in September 2026 from £2.61 to £2.66  coupled  with the extension of free school meal eligibility to all children from families receiving Universal credit is likely to enable about 500,000 extra children to receiver free school meals but that it is also estimated expected  to generate a financial shortfall in funding for the 500,000 additional pupils of £47.5 million. If these estimates are correct, this is problematical

 

 

 

The Two Child Benefit Cap

Prior to the UK General Election of 2024, Keir Starmer and his supporters were keen to emphasise that, if elected, a Labour Government would maintain strict control over the public finances in the interest of the financial stability for the economic growth on which future government spending would depend. Thus, Labour promised that there would be no increases in rates of income tax, Vat and National insurance contribution and no loosening of the fiscal rules constraining the extent of government borrowing. Increases in government spending would therefore be heavily dependent upon the increased taxation revenues derived for increased economic growth yet, unfortunately for Labour, most economists believed that that the prospects for increased economic growth were limited and that this in turn would limit Labour’s ability to increase total government spending. However, within these limitations, it was expected that increased spending was most likely on Health, Education and Defence but that in other Departments there might be reductions in spending.

The Labour Party has always recognise the deprivation caused by significant levels of poverty but in 2023, Keir Starmer while still in opposition had ruled out the possibility of scrapping the two child benefit cap on payment of universal credit Once Labour was returned to government  , pressure for the scrapping of the 2 child benefit cap intensified among anti-Poverty campaigners  and backbench Labour MPs. During the Debate on the King’s Seech Keir Starmer announced the setting up of a Child Poverty Task Force but in an intervention during the King’s Speech Debate, Leadr of the SNP  in Westminster Stephen Flynn called for the immediate withdrawal of the two child benefit cap. In his response Keir Starmer stated that “It can’t be a single issue   … it’s across number of srands… what matters is the commitment to do it and to drive those numbers down.

However , a few days later the Stephen Flynn SNP proposed an amendment to the Kings Speech  calling for the Abolition of the two child benefit cap and when 7 Labour MPs voted against the Government and in favour of the SNP amendment they had the Labour Party Whip withdrawn . However , the Amendment was defeated  by 363-Click here for further information from the Guardian on the 2 Child Benefit Ca.

Nevertheless, opposition to the two-child benefit cap continued into 2025 and it was clear that the Labour Government’s attitude was softening when 6 of the 7 Labour rebels were readmitted to the Party on September 25^th. On November 25^th as part of the Autumn 2025 budget Rachel Reeves announced that with effect from April 2026 the two child benefit cap would be removed.

Click here and here  and here  for further details from the BBC on the two Child benefit cap .

  Public opinion data from YouGov indicating that as of November 2025 support for retention rather than abolition of the two-child benefit cap. It is interesting to look at variations in attitudes to this issue by Region, Gender, Politics, Age, and Social Grade.

Note also that the Conservative Party states that if returned to government it would reverse this policy for reasons which are outlined by Conservative leader Kemi Basenoch here.  You might like to discuss this political issue with your teachers.

The debate continues.

The Current [January 2026] Universal Credit Child allowances are £3390 per month for first child born before 6 April 2017 and £ 292.81 for a first child born after 6 April 2017 and £292.81 for second child and any other eligible children. There are more benefits for disabled children.

Labour and Private Schools 2020- 2026

Click here for additional information from the BBC

In 2021 Shadow Chancellor Racel Reeves announced that it intended to remove Private Schools Charitable Status  but the Labour Party modified its policy slightly in late 2023 and in its 2024 General Election Manifesto the Labour Party stated that, if elected to government, it would end the exemption of private schools from the payment of VAT on school fees and the exemption of private schools from the payment of business rates and use the additional taxation revenues [estimated to rise from £460M in 2024/2025 to £1.725 B in 2029/30] partly  to finance an increase in  employment of 6,500 teachers in the state education sector.

[Recent data indicate that although the DfE is making fair progress toward its target of recruiting 6,500 new teachers in England, the total number of teachers in England is actually falling. For further technical details on recent teacher recruitment  Click here , Click here  and Click here .It is especially important to note that the total number of pupils in schools in England has also decreased ]  

 

These proposals predictably generated criticism from the private education sector and from many parents using the private education sector for their children.

1. It was claimed that many parents using the private education sector were not especially wealthy and that the increase in school fees arising from the imposition of VAT  would force then  to switch their children to the state education sector  which would both reduce the taxation revenues which  the Labour Party hoped to be able to spend on the expansion of the state sector and increase the pressures on the state education sector which would arise as a result of pupils switching from the private education sector to the state education sector.

1. It was claimed that the imposition of VAT on school fees would cause demand for private schooling to fall to such an extent that some private schools would be forced to close which would generate pressures on state schools in the areas where private schools were closing.

1. Some parents stated that they opted for private education rather than state education because their children had special educational needs which could be addressed more effectively in the private sector than in the state sector. Consequently, it was argued that the imposition of VAT on private school fees would discriminate specifically against SEND pupils

However, it has also been argued that these criticisms of Labour Party policy are themselves open to criticism.

1. The most prestigious private schools charge very high fees which have increased significantly in recent years without any significant reduction in demand for private education. This has led the IFS to claim that the imposition of VAT would not lead to a significant reduction in demand for private education at the most prestigious private schools.
2. However, some private schools do face a more difficult financial situation, but it is argued that when these schools claim that the imposition of VAT on school fees may force them to close, some of these schools may have been facing closure in any case.
3. It is pointed out that because of demographic factors, the total school population can be expected to decline in the coming years  which means that if some pupils leave the private sector , they can be accommodated  in the state system with little increases in costs although there might be some increasing cost pressures in state schools in some areas. Click here for projection statistics 2023- 2028.
4. It is pointed out that within the broad category of SEND children, there are children who have an Education and Health Care Plan, and that VAT will not be chargeable on fees for these children. However, VAT will be charged on fees for other SEND children without an EHCP, and it is argued therefore that the VAT charge may oblige some parents of these children to switch them to the state sector where facilities for SEND children may be worse. Yet it is argued that if SEND facilities are worse in the state sector this points to a pressing need to improve SEND facilities in the state sector rather than a case for the maintenance of superior resources in the private sector. Click here for recent data on numbers of SEND and EHCP pupils in England.
5. VAT on Private school fees was introduced on January 1^st, 2025, across the UK

 

For Further Information

Click here for private schools

Click here and here  for Labour reversal of decision to end Private Schools’ charitable status

Click here for additional information on Labour’s Private Schools Policy from the BBC

Click here for Guardian on Labour’ Private Schools Policy.

Click here  and here and here for IFS and VAT on Private Schools

Click here for Guardian article indicating that number of Private School pupils has increased in recent years despites increased fees.

Click here for a BBC debate on the cases for and against charging VAT on Private School Fees

Click here for the Private Education Policy Forum [website for the discussion of Private Education].

Click here for House of Commons Library Research Briefing: VAT on private school fees [June 2026]

 Court Case

Labour’s intention to charge VAT on private school fees was challenged in the High Court but in June 2015 the High Court found Labour’s policy to be legal as is indicated in these articles from the BBC and the Guardian respectively.

However, controversy over the issue remains as indicated  here  and here 

Click here for Latest Court of Appeal judgment and click here for Elitist Britain

Click here for private schools

Click here for private schools

 

Labour and Education Policy: 2024- 2026  A Summary

The Labour Government elected in 2024 has aimed to increase total government spending on education in England slightly, to reform the National Curriculum, to introduce , new educational policies at all levels of state education and to impose VAT on private school fees. It has also recognised that pupils’ educational progress depends significantly on material factors external to the education system and has therefore introduced a range of welfare policies designed to mitigate the effects of poverty on educational achievement. Government spokespersons argue that their education policies reflect broadly social democratic principles and that they are aiming to spend money as effectively as possible in difficult economic circumstances. However, these policies might also be criticised from different sociological perspectives and /or because the money allocated to education has been insufficient and/or spent ineffectively.

Broad sociological criticism of Labour’s policies has focused especially on reforms to the Academies programme, the proposals designed to improve the childcare system and the overall quality of the schools system, t to reorganise and improve the provision of education for children with special educational needs [SEND} ,to improve the education system for 16 -19-year-olds especially by increasing its vocational relevance and to improve the system of Higher Education. There have also been criticisms of the imposition of VAT on private school fees and on some of Labour’s welfare reforms, most notably the removal of the two-child cap on eligibility for the childcare benefit element of Universal Credit. However, these policies have been defended by Labour spokespersons and also by some sociologists who might nevertheless argue that they do not go far enough to extend equality of opportunity throughout the education system as a whole

The Labour Government has in general accepted that the academies system has in the past contributed to improved educational efficiency and rising levels of educational achievement but in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act [2026] has introduced changes making for greater regulation of Academies such that in the future, All Academies will be forced to follow the new National Curriculum, which Is currently being devised, to employ teachers who are either professionally qualified or working toward a nationally recognised professional qualification and to pay salaries which are at least equal to nationally agreed salary rates.   It was initially proposed that all state school teachers , including those in Academies , would be subject to the same regulations on pay and conditions but as a result of a parliamentary amendment , it was agreed instead that academies would be allowed to pay teachers above the national rates  but would not be allowed to pay them below the national rates. Thus, there would be “a floor but not a ceiling.”

 

Prior to the Act local authority-maintained schools judged by Ofsted to be requiring special measures or requiring significant improvement would be compelled to become an Academy but following the Act although the Government might still compel failing schools to become academies, many failing schools will receive help via new RISE teams while remaining under local authority control.  Click here and here and here and here for RISE 

Prior to the ACT, all new schools opened had to be Free Schools but under the terms of the Act Local Councils will still have to invite proposals for planned free schools but may also submit plans for new local authority-maintained schools.

 

It is intended that all schools should become members of School Trusts. Click here for some detailed information on the growth of multi-academy trusts.

Ofsted will now inspect Multi- Academy Trusts, and the Secretary of State will also have greater powers to regulate the activities of Multi-Academy Trusts.

 

 Academies will now have to cooperate with local councils over admissions so that, for example, The schools adjudicator could prevent Academies from increasing their admissions if there are vacancies in local authority-maintained schools in the same area.

 

However, critics of academisation have argued that there is little evidence that academisation has contributed to better examination results; that some academies are run poorly and possibly corruptly; that academisation has resulted in greater inequality of educational opportunity; and that therefore the academisation programme should be reformed more fundamentally or possibly discontinued entirely. Conversely, however, it has been argued from a New Right perspective that Labour’s new regulations of academies will actually undermine the very autonomy which has enabled academies to improve examination results in the first place, although of course, this conclusion has also been disputed.

 

As stated above, Labour has introduced reforms at all levels of the English education system,

Labour introduced the same extensions of free childcare which had originally been introduced by the previous Conservative Government. Improved provision of childcare has clearly been necessary but it has been argued that the effectiveness of the new policies may be limited because they provide more help to working parents than to more disadvantaged parents who may be particularly in need of help; because the government funds allocated to private childcare providers may be insufficient  to cover their cots  which have risen recently due to the increased employers national insurance contributions and the increased minimum wage imposed by the Labour Government; because there is an especial shortage of childcare facilities in socially disadvantaged area; because the quantity and quality of childcare workers is limited; and because Labour’s plan to provide more nurseries within existing primary schools , although helpful, will be insufficient in themselves to end the shortage of childcare places; and also because although primary school -based nurseries may be suitable for 3-4 year olds, they as less suitable for 9 month-two year olds.

The key document outlining Labours proposed reforms of the English education system is the Government White Paper entitled Every Child Achieving and Thriving    .   which contains proposals for the reform of the English school system as a whole and in particular for reform of education provision for pupils with special education needs and disabilities. Regarding the overall English school system, the White Paper specifies the aims of improving the overall effectiveness of the system and reducing the disadvantage gap at GCSE level by 50% by the time pupils born in 2024 reach the age of 16. This is obviously a long-term objective, but shorter-term targets are also specified. A wide range of policies are proposed to help to meet these targets: : improved early years childcare [already discussed] to provide secure foundations; a reformed national curriculum; employment of more state school teachers; better use of educational research findings; better communications with parents; changes to the national funding formula to ensure increased financing for schools in disadvantaged areas; reducing the importance of eligibility for free school meals as the criterion for allocation of the pupil premium so as to differentiate between pupils experiencing short term and long term material disadvantages; and additional funding for schools in the Northeast and in disadvantaged coastal areas .

These are sensible policies, but it has been pointed out that it has always been difficult to reduce the disadvantage gap, and it is therefore difficult to assess the likely effectiveness of these policies. As has been noted, planned increases in education spending are small and may be insufficient to implement the planned policies fully. The Labour Government has recognised that levels of educational achievement are dependent upon a mixture of internal and external factors and has introduced a range of new welfare policies designed to mitigate the effects of social and economic disadvantage but if,in the next 10 years there is little overall reduction in economic and social inequality, the prospects for increased equality of educational opportunity are likely to remain limited. Further information on Labour welfare policies relevant to educational achievement is provided below.

The White Paper also contains proposals for the reform of SEND provision which is without any doubt an important priority.

Click here for the White Paper Every Child achieving and thriving and  Click here for a summary of the SEND component of the White Paper from the House of Commons Library.

Click here for the Key Changes to SEND and here for further details and  here for potential difficulties from the BBC.

Click here and Click here and here and here and here for various items from the BBC on SEND.

Prior to the Schools White Paper, the Labour Government also published The post 16 Education and Skills White Papera Skills White Paper which emphasises that it is essential that young people are well prepared and qualified to secure employment in an increasingly technologically based economy.

Click here for The Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper 10^th December 2025

Click here for the House of Commons Library summary of the Post16 Education and Skills White Paper

Click here for an analysis of the Post 16 Education and Skills White Paper [from the IFS ]

Click here for the Guardian view on the Skills White Paper.

It is noted in the White Paper that reform of Childcare provision, the school system  and Special Educational Needs and Disabilities facilities will all contribute to the improvement in employment skills but the Skills White Paper also includes additional initiatives including new level two courses, reorganisation of the courses preparing students to resit GCSE English and Mathematics, replacement of the 50% Higher Education entry target by a 75% Higher Education and Further Education target the introduction of new V level courses, reform of the Apprenticeship system to include much shorter apprenticeship units, reform of the Further Education system including increased funding,  more effective recruitment, retention and continuing professional development of teachers, the designation of particularly effective F.E colleges as technical excellence colleges which are to provide level 4 and 5 courses especially in the areas of defence, advanced manufacturing, clean energy and digital  and closer links between Further and Higher Education.

 

 The Post16 Education and Skills White Paper also addresses Higher Education issues. The Government intends to strengthen the connections between Higher and Further Education sectors in the provision of higher-level technical courses’

It intends to increase the financial stability of the Higher Education Sector by ensuring that in future undergraduate tuition fee caps will be increased in line with inflation, conditional on providers’ quality ratings. Maintenance loans are to be increased in line with inflation and new means tested grants are to be introduced for students on priority courses, financed by a new levy on international student fees.  However, it is as yet unclear which courses will attract maintenance grants and University spokespersons have stated that the levy on international student fees may well affect university finances adversely.

The overall research strategy of the Higher Education sector is to be streamlined to ensure that “curiosity driven research” is protected and promoted but that university research will also be linked effectively to the needs of the economy.

Labour has also imposed VAT on private school fees and intends to use the revenues raised to employ more state schoolteachers in socially deprived areas. Labour claim that the mainly affluent parents who opt for private education for their children can easily afford the increases in costs which are likely to arise and that to spend the extra tax revenues generated to help more disadvantaged pupils is in line with social justice Critics of Labour’ policy claim that it is unjust to tax parents additionally if they wish to spend their money on their children’s education; that not all parents choosing private education are affluent; and that  if the VAT charge forces parents to switch their children from the private sector to the state sector this will exacerbate the shortage of resources that state schools already face> It is claimed also that some parents are using the private sector because it can provide resources for SEND pupils which are not available in the State sector so that the policy will discriminate against these SEND pupils.

However, these criticisms have not been accepted by supporter of the imposition of VAT on private school fees. They argue that most parents choosing private education are relatively affluent; that it is unjust that they can afford to buy a superior [in many but not all cases] education for their children;; that few pupils will leave the private sector as a result of the imposition of VAT on fees; that falling state school rolls will mean that any increase in numbers switching  from the private sector can easily be accommodated in the state sector [although there may be regional shortages of state school places]; and that it is necessary to improve SEND facilities in state schools so that all SEND pupils have equal access to good facilities .

Note also that many supporters of the imposition of VAT on private school fees would also claim that Labour should go much further and abolish private education entirely although this is, to say the least, somewhat unlikely in the foreseeable future.

When Sir Martyn Oliver took over as Head of Ofsted in January 2024, he stated that he intended to ensure that the Ofsted inspections process would be more collaborative, less stressful and more effective. The Labour Government announced in September 2024 that Ofsted’s one-and -two word summary conclusions would be discontinued and Sir Martyn Oliver initiated a process for the development of much fuller report cards which would vary slightly depending upon the stage of education system being inspected and would contain short assessment of school quality over a range of criteria supplemented by fuller information to explain how the summary judgements had been arrived at.

However, critics quickly claimed that the new report cards would be difficult for parents to interpret while individual teachers and teachers’ unions claimed that the new inspections process would do nothing to reduces the stresses associated with the original process Headteachers’ unions at various times called for judicial review to investigate the legality of the new inspections regime and also threatened to advise their members not to participate as Ofsted inspectors. They also threatened to resort to industrial action if the new inspection regime was introduced.

Be that as it may, the new report cards were introduced, and new inspections began in November 2025. However, it some became clear that many teachers felt that the new system had not addressed the failures of the old inspections system. A survey of headteachers revealed widespread dissatisfaction with the new system and there were particular concerns that more inclusive schools were less likely to achieve positive assessments despite  Ofsted claims that inspections are unbiased in this respect> Sir Martyn Oliver appeared before the Select Committee on Education to defend the Ofsted record but opposition to current Ofsted inspections is are still widespread as are calls for further reforms and , in some cases, for the abolition of Ofsted.

The Labour Government has recognised that levels of educational achievement are very dependent upon the material circumstances of pupils and have therefore introduced a range of welfare policies to mitigate inequalities of educational achievement. Thus, via the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Act [2026] Labour has introduced breakfast clubs, has extended eligibility criteria for free school meals and has capped uniform requirements at three items. There are few criticisms in principle with Labour’s extension of free school meal eligibility, but it is claimed that the increase in funding made available for the scheme is inadequate and could lead to reduced meal quality. There are also some [fairly muted] criticisms of Labour’s uniform policy changes from those who are in favour of fuller school uniforms.

Labour has also removed the two-child cap on eligibility for the childcare benefit component of Universal Credit. Labour has claimed that latter policy will reduce child poverty significantly and contribute indirectly but importantly to increased equality of educational opportunity. However, Conservatives have argued that this policy is unfair because it will result in the imposition of higher taxes on people ineligible for the new benefit which allegedly will result in work disincentives, lower economic growth and even increased poverty. Of course, Labour disputes this critical conclusion.

In summary Labour has introduced a wide range of mildly social democratic education policies which appear sensible in their own terms but these policies have been criticised by Conservatives for the interference with previous conservative policies and by radical social democrats and Marxists because of insufficient government spending on education and failure to make a clearer break with previous policies based around the quasi- marketisation of education. In practice, it may be that Labour’s education policies may be modified by the new Secretary of State for Education Lucy Powell and in any case e we shall not be able to assess for several years whether Labour’s education plans have been successful.

Labour and Education Policy: Part Two Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Secretary of State for Education Lucy Powell 2026

As Lucy Powell replaced Bridget Phillipson as Secretary of State for Education, teachers’ union leaders complimented Bridget Phillipson for her efforts but emphasised also that the English Education system was still afflicted by a range of long-term problems which had yet to be solved.

Click here for Schools Week coverage News and here for FE News coverage of the appointment of Lucy Powell as Secretary of Ste for Education. Click here for a Guardian article from 2015 on Lucy Powell as the then Labour Shadow Secretary of State for Education

Click here for Lucy Powell’s in-tray

Click here for Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Education

Click here and here for new proposals for technical education

To be continued