Josh MacAlister
MP for Whitehaven and Workington · Labour · United Kingdom
“Just this Saturday, as a constituency MP, I saw the amazing impact of Kells in bringing the community together, especially children. That community building comes down to great characters, such as Peter Smith at Kells or Vince and Lana at Derwent Park Rangers, who have all been getting into schools to teach rugby league for well over 20 y…”
“The changes that we are making will address the objectives that the hon. Member set out in his questions. In closing, I place on the record my thanks to teachers, volunteers, coaches, school leaders, local clubs and national governing bodies for the work they do every day to create sporting opportunities for young people across our countr…”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Vickers. I thank the hon. Member for West Dorset (Edward Morello) for securing this important debate on rugby in schools. When I was asked to sub in for the Minister for School Standards in responding to this debate, I knew that it would not be trying.”
“That is exactly what we are trying to do with the school sport partnerships model. We recognise that despite the funding of recent years, participation in school sport has remained fairly flat; it is well below what we need as a country in order to have a healthy population of young people who benefit from all that sport has to offer.”
“We must ensure that girls in every community have access to high-quality rugby opportunities through curriculum PE, extracurricular activity and inclusive formats that allow them to build confidence, develop skills and enjoy being active.”
“Their contribution can help schools to achieve the right balance between participation and competition. We know that those are not competing priorities, as every child should have the opportunity to participate, develop competence and build confidence through the sport.”
The complete record
Every one of 580 lines we hold for Josh MacAlister, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 12.
“We have worked closely with the Information Commissioner’s Office, practitioners and other Government Departments to ensure that the duty supports sharing across the full breadth of safeguarding or when promoting the welfare of children. That, along with the single unique identifier—which I referenced in the debate on this matter in October—will help professionals build a clearer picture of a child’s life. Crucially, and relevant to Maya’s story, the information-sharing duty requires practitioners to share information with each other about other individuals in a child’s life where that information is relevant to safeguarding or promoting a child’s welfare. More robust information sharing will enable practitioners to act on and inform families of concerns appropriately.”
“At this point, I want to pay particular tribute to Tony Hudgell’s family for their campaigning on this specific change. Finally, through our Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, we are addressing long-standing misconceptions about when information can and cannot be shared. We are introducing a new information-sharing duty and placing a clear legal obligation on police, children’s social care, health and other relevant agencies to share information to safeguard children. That responds directly to findings from, among others, the independent review of children’s social care, which I led before being elected to this House. It found that despite existing legislation there were both perceived and real barriers to sharing information between different agencies.”
“The clauses in that Bill will mean that chief police officers will have a statutory duty to follow the Secretary of State’s guidance, which will be issued shortly after the passage of the Bill on Sarah’s law. In practice, that will reinforce and strengthen the police’s responsibility to make disclosures whenever necessary to protect a child. In addition, the same Bill will establish a new child cruelty register. That will require adults convicted of child cruelty offences to notify the police of key changes in their circumstances in the same way that registered sex offenders need to at the moment. That improves the visibility of known risks and supports police to make informed decisions, including where disclosure under existing schemes, such as Sarah’s law, may be necessary to protect a child.”
“Sarah’s law does not rely solely on applications from members of the public; it also provides a framework for the police to make proactive disclosures when they believe a child is at risk of serious harm. For example, if the police become aware of an adult with a conviction, caution or charge for child abuse having unsupervised access to a child, they can and will disclose that information to the person best placed to protect that child—usually a parent, carer or guardian—whether or not a Sarah’s law application has been made. That is the current situation, which goes far beyond just cases of child sexual abuse, but in the Crime and Policing Bill currently before Parliament the Government are going further by strengthening Sarah’s law and placing it on a statutory footing.”
“Although formally known as the child sex offender disclosure scheme, it extends well beyond those offences to the disclosure of any relevant information that the police hold that is necessary to protect a child. That may include previous convictions for child sexual abuse, a history of child cruelty, domestic violence or intelligence relating to violent or sexual offences. The maximum timescale for Sarah’s law applications to be completed is 28 days from start to finish unless extenuating circumstances justify an extension. Where an imminent risk of harm to a child is identified, the police must take immediate action to safeguard those at risk.”
“First, through strengthening the child sex offender disclosure scheme, which been referenced throughout the debate; secondly, through the introduction of a child cruelty register, which was not something on the cards when we last had this debate in October; and thirdly, through introducing a new information sharing duty in the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill. Those changes cover different aspects of sharing information; they are changes that will come into effect in law and some of them are new since the debate we had at the end of last year. As referenced in the petition, Sarah’s law already allows members of the public to make an application to the police for information where they have a child protection concern, enabling the police to disclose information to those best placed to safeguard a child from harm.”
“Through their petition, they are calling for the creation of a child risk disclosure scheme known as Maya’s law, which would require statutory services to disclose relevant past history when a risk is identified, establish multi-agency responses with protocols, and empower professionals to raise alerts where known risks exist. Changes to deliver the goals of Maya’s law are, I believe, in train. We are taking a number of steps to further strengthen existing schemes and improve multi-agency working. I hope to set out in some detail how the Government are doing that. At the moment, the Government are taking action to strengthen information sharing in particular in three separate but complimentary ways.”
“94WH.] I want to recognise Maya’s family, in particular Gemma and Rachael who I have had the privilege to meet and spend time with over the past few months. Their unwavering determination took the petition from more than 6,000 responses back in October to 110,000 when it closed in February. I am grateful to them for giving up their time to meet with not just me, but my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Education and officials from the Home Office. I am grateful for their ongoing, tireless campaign to bring about change.”
“It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Mundell. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Sunderland Central (Lewis Atkinson) for securing this debate, and for doing so in a way that builds on the important debate held in this Chamber on 14 October, secured by my hon. Friend the Member for Blaydon and Consett (Liz Twist). I also thank all the Members who have contributed to this debate today from across different parties and have recognised the amazing young children whose lives were tragically cut far too short. I also want to reiterate what I said on 14 October because it underpins the whole debate: no child should ever suffer at the hands of someone who was entrusted with their care and “no family should endure such a loss.” —[ Official Report, 14 October 2025; Vol. 773, c.”
“Friend the Member for Sunderland Central for opening this debate, and all those who have contributed to it. Let us honour Maya’s memory with not just words but change as soon as possible, so that no child is left unprotected, and no family unheard.”
“That is why we are delivering landmark reforms by overhauling children’s social care, not just through the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill in the ways that I have highlighted, but with £2.4 billion of investment in changing our family help and child protection systems. We are also introducing multi-agency child protection teams, which will be mandated through the Bill, enhancing the child sex offender disclosure scheme and introducing the new child cruelty register. Together, those reforms put learning into action. I hope to continue working with Gemma, Rachael and other family members who have been affected by these awful tragic stories to strengthen the implementation of these reforms, as well as others in the future. They reflect the loud call for change that this petition rightly demands. I thank my hon.”
“My hon. Friend is quite right to highlight that the question for children’s social care teams and anyone involved as a statutory safeguarding partner for these children needs to be: who is around this child who loves and cares about them? That will differ significantly among children. The hon. Member for Keighley and Ilkley (Robbie Moore) mentioned a case where it was the grandparent who was a really important part of a child’s life and was missing from the picture. We need to make sure the statutory guidance reflects that among children it will often be very different. Strengthening child protection is this Government’s absolute priority, which means acting early so that the right support is in place before harms occur.”
“I give special thanks to the expert advisory group chaired by Anna Dawe OBE, principal of Wigan & Leigh college, a technical excellence college, and I commend the regulations to the Committee.”
“For the first time, Government, employers and prospective teachers will have transparency over what training is offered, where it is offered and who is offering it—transparency that supports a quality focus in the further education ITT system. We want evidence-based standards that will help to drive consistency and improvement. Regulation will not constrain innovation and providers will retain flexibility to exercise professional judgment and expertise, as they do in initial teacher training in the schools space. The Department has engaged extensively with further education colleges and teacher training sector stakeholders; public consultations, a call for evidence and ongoing engagement have shaped the measures and there is broad consensus that the approach will drive up standards and maintain necessary flexibility.”
“Trainees in further education teaching have not always had the high-quality preparation that they require and employers cannot always be confident that their new teachers have the necessary knowledge and skills to perform their role. Providers of FE teacher training courses specified by Government in this statutory instrument will be required to have regard to guidance on curriculum content and on delivery standards, to register with the Department for Education and to submit regular information and data to the DFE. We want the standards to be proportionate, but meaningful in terms of the shift they deliver.”
“These regulations introduce a system across all types of providers of FE teacher training: universities, colleges, training providers and any other organisation offering specified FE teacher training courses. The regulations are based on clear expectations and quality standards and align with Ofsted’s initial teacher training education framework, which has been extended to encompass all publicly funded FE ITT. Historically, the Government have regulated primary and secondary teacher training, but that has not applied to further education. Excellence does exist in parts of the system, but provision is inconsistent and some poor practice has been identified in recent years.”
“I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Further Education (Initial Teacher Training) Regulations 2026. Thank you, Dr Huq, for chairing this Committee. Teacher training quality is critical across all phases of education, from early years through to adult education. In October 2025, the skills White Paper set out the vision for England’s skills system. The further education sector is central to that vision and requires high-quality teacher training to drive progress. The Government are acting to secure and improve the quality of FE teacher training; a high-quality, accessible and attractive teacher training offer will improve recruitment and retention in further education, support the commitment to recruit an additional 6,500 teachers and demonstrate a commitment to raising teaching standards across schools and colleges.”
“The focus on what is perhaps a less exciting political debate, the content of teaching for those who teach, is so important; it is probably one of the biggest single drivers of performance in our education system, whether in primary school, secondary school or colleges. It is right and timely that we are now making those changes in the further education system that have led to positive progress and made a difference in our schools system. I thank members of the Committee for their consideration and you, Dr Huq, for chairing the Committee. Question put and agreed to.”
“There is an opportunity here for a brief respite from what might be happening in the rest of the building and to share some cross-party agreement, so let me say that we were delighted that the previous Conservative Government, and before them the coalition Government, continued many of the reforms that the former Labour Government initiated in the academies programme and the focus on evidence. Across the House, there has been some solid progress in the education system, which has benefited many young people. I hope this is an area where we can continue to work on a constructive, cross-party basis.”
“Each provider needs to be well run, delivering the very best value for students and operating as efficiently as possible. To conclude, the draft SI will put our higher education sector on a more secure footing, giving it greater financial certainty and therefore enabling it to deliver the world-class higher education that current and future generations deserve.”
“We have an expectation of the higher education sector too. We expect it to do more to improve access for those from disadvantaged backgrounds, and to focus on efficiency and specialisation to deliver the very best value for students and for the country. We will make future fee uplifts conditional on higher education providers achieving a high-quality threshold through the Office for Students quality regime. That will protect taxpayers’ investment in higher education and reward providers for high quality. We will set out further details on future changes to tuition fee caps in due course. We are clear that the diversity of the sector is a strength, but each provider needs to be clear on their distinctive role in the system and to move away from a one-size-fits-all approach.”
“We inherited a broken system and we take borrowers’ complaints seriously. We have already committed to reintroducing maintenance grants and to future-proofing our maintenance support offer by increasing loans for living costs with forecast inflation every academic year from ’26-27. We will continue to look for ways to make the system fairer. The Government are firmly committed to ensuring that access to higher education is based on ability and aspiration, not financial means. Eligible students can continue to apply for up-front fee loans to meet the full cost of their tuition. Given the inherited fiscal situation, we are making those necessary decisions to protect taxpayers and students. The Government continuously review student finance to ensure that it remains fair, sustainable and supportive of students from all backgrounds.”
“It will mean that for the ’26-27 academic year, from 1 August ’26 onwards, tuition fee limits for undergraduate courses will increase by 2.71% and, for the ’27-28 academic year, from 1 August ’27 onwards, by a further 2.68%, in line with forecast inflation based on the RPIX inflation index. That means an increase to £9,790 for a standard full-time course in ’26-27 and to £10,050 in ’27-28. It means an increase to £11,750 for a full-time accelerated course in ’26-27 and to £12,060 in ’27-28. The fee limits that apply to lower fee foundation years for classroom-based subjects, such as business, social science and humanities, that begin on or after 1 August ’25 are preserved at ’25-26 levels for ’26-27 and ’27-28. I recognise that people have concerns about the student finance system and the affordability of higher education.”
“We started to fix the foundations by increasing fee limits for ’25-26 and boosting the sector’s income, but we must go further if we are to put the sector on a stable footing and provide it with the greater financial certainty that it needs. That can be achieved by boosting incomes, with conditions about improving the teaching quality. That is why, through this draft SI, we intend to raise fee limits for a further two years. That is necessary to ensure that the sector can face the challenges of the next decade and that students today and in the future can receive a world-class higher education.”
“The sector is also crucial to our future prosperity and wealth as a country, but now it is facing severe challenges. Office for Students analysis suggests that without mitigating action, 45% of institutions face a deficit in ’25-26. English providers are attempting to manage significant financial pressures, including the £1.7 billion loss, in aggregate, on domestic teaching and the need for providers to draw on other income to cover it. Such challenges have been unaddressed for far too long, and seven years of frozen tuition fees, plus over-optimistic strategic and financial planning and potential issues with governance, have contributed to the financial challenges facing providers. The Government have not shied away from these decisions.”
“The SI, which was laid in draft on 5 February, increases the limits on tuition fees that higher education providers can charge students studying undergraduate courses at “approved (fee cap) providers” in the ’26-27 and ’27-28 academic years. Our higher education sector is critical to delivering a key mission of this Government—economic growth. It does that through world-leading research and innovation, supporting businesses up and down the country, and by equipping people with the knowledge and skills that they need to thrive. In one way or another, higher education plays a part in the lives of most people in this country, whether through direct participation in university, through research or through its role in our local communities. We are all impacted by universities.”
“I beg to move, That the Committee has considered the draft Higher Education (Fee Limits and Fee Limit Condition) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2026. It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Sir John. To begin, I would like to take this opportunity briefly to explain that in the explanatory note for the statutory instrument, there was a discrepancy, in that it stated that the percentage increase for 2026-27 was 2.7% when it should have stated 2.71%, and that the percentage increase for ’27-28 was 2.8% when it should have stated 2.68%. I can reassure hon. Members that a correction slip has been arranged regarding that, and the other figures in the draft SI—the consequential figures in monetary terms—are not affected.”
“I have not had the chance to look at her speeches or voting record from the time, but from 2012 onward the Conservative Government of the day designed and introduced the very system that she is now criticising. In the year that the system was introduced, they made a commitment not to freeze thresholds but to increase them. However, in their very first year, they froze the thresholds.”
“I thank Committee members for their contributions today. I will endeavour to respond to the points made by the hon. Members for Rutland and Stamford and for St Neots and Mid Cambridgeshire, but before I do, let me reiterate the importance of this statutory instrument for putting our higher education sector on a secure financial footing and providing the financial certainty that it needs. I have not heard how either the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats would propose to do that in the absence of this statutory instrument for the financial years under discussion. There are few phrases to describe the position of the Conservative party other than “crocodile tears”. The hon. Member for Rutland and Stamford highlighted repayment thresholds.”
“I would be delighted to give way if the hon. Lady will answer this question: how many other times were thresholds frozen by that Government?”
“I am pleased to hear that that is where the hon. Lady was at that time. The Conservative Government and the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition froze thresholds 10 times.”
“Challenges in higher education have been left unaddressed for far too long, and providers have suffered a significant real-terms decline in their income. The Government have not shied away from the decisions that are needed. We took action to raise the fee cap in 2025-26, and we have committed to bringing back maintenance grants and future-proofing maintenance loans for students, but we need to go further so that that our higher education sector can continue to deliver the world-class education and research that this country and future generations deserve.”
“It is somewhat galling to hear that the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are outraged that this Government, who were able to find the money to lift the threshold in our first year in office, are now balancing difficult decisions so that we can make sure that we have the funding needed for further education, since over half of students do not go to university and need a well-resourced skills system. Both parties seem now to be walking away from their responsibility to make a system that they designed work effectively, which is unfortunate. The Committee will know how crucial this sector is for our economic growth—I am sure this is felt across the House. Members will recognise its importance in contributing to research and innovation and the impact that it has on local communities and the lives of students.”
“Certainly not. In fact, the current student loan system—I believe it is plan 5—which is due to come online with the first graduates this year, has been increased in line with inflation by this Government. The point stands that the choice of the Government back then was to maintain the threshold where it was and effectively freeze it, capturing many more people into the system. The cumulative effect of 10 threshold freezes in a decade where inflation was ticking up is being felt by students now.”
“As a Minister, I have spent time listening to MPs making very powerful representations about the challenges that universities in their constituencies face because of the legacy of the erosion of the value of the fee income. If we were to not increase fees in line with inflation, which is what we are talking about here, it would further add to that funding challenge that universities face. I do not think it would be responsible for us to do that, given that the financial years we are talking about are pretty imminent.”
“I appreciate my hon. Friend drawing the Committee’s attention to the wider debate around higher education funding at the moment. It is true to say that fee income is only one line of income for universities and that they are facing a whole bunch of pressures in a competitive environment. The Government are committed to looking at the student loan system and making it fairer. I have made that commitment, as have the Prime Minister and the Education Secretary. One urgent point that I would draw the Committee’s attention to is that a number of years of freezes on the tuition fee cap has eroded the income value, which is a significant income stream for universities. If that were to continue, it would further heighten the situation.”
“I am sure that the Committee will be delighted that I will give a short answer, and I can provide a point of reassurance. Of course, universities have responsibility to ensure that they contribute to upholding human rights and freedom of speech, and they have an important role to play in that. We have plans to strengthen their role and responsibility in that respect along with the role of the Office for Students. It is an important point to highlight, even though it is not directly relevant to this SI. Question put and agreed to .”
“We will consider ways to make the student loan system fairer, as the Prime Minister said last week. This Government have already reintroduced maintenance grants and raised the repayment threshold to above average graduate salaries, and we are acting across the board on the cost of living by bringing down inflation and tackling transport, energy and rental costs.”
“We had a Westminster Hall debate about this last week, and it is good to see that the debate continues. We will consider ways to make the system fairer; there are a range of options. The threshold freeze raises £5.9 billion next year, and it is incumbent on any party that is serious about fiscal prudence to set out how it would pay for changes.”
“I recognise my hon. Friend’s description of recent history and how we have ended up where we are today. We will consider ways to make the system fairer. As I say, there are a range of options, and we need to do it carefully.”
“I hope the right hon. Member started by apologising to Sammi in his correspondence, because the last Government froze the threshold on 10 separate occasions. I could list them all. They started in the year that the policy was designed and introduced—the same year in which the commitment was made to increase the threshold in line with inflation, which the Conservatives did not do.”
“I know the Chair of the Education Committee is looking at these issues and the Government will be very interested in that work. We will set out the details of our work soon. My hon. Friend is right to highlight how transformational higher education can be. I would not want any young person outside this place who is listening to this debate to take away from it that they should not make every step forward to follow their talents. The Brit awards were just a few days ago and including some brilliant British talent, many of whom were on creative arts courses at university.”
“I would like to think there is cross-party agreement that tackling educational inequality is one of the most important things that we can do. It is a shame on our country that we are one of the most unequal when it comes to the relationship between how well a child can do at school and how much money is in their parents’ pockets. The Labour party is all about addressing such inequalities, and that is what this Government are doing. That is in no way at odds with finding ways to make our student loan system fairer and fixing it after the 10 years of freezes on thresholds by the Conservatives that hit working graduates.”
“I thank my hon. Friend for his advocacy for a technical excellence college in his constituency. We have launched the applications for 19 of those. They get to the core of what this Labour Government are about, which is creating opportunities in every corner of this country.”
“The SNP’s track record on education is so poor they needed to pull out of the programme for international student assessment—or PISA—league tables because Scotland was plummeting so low. There is a chance to fix that in the elections later on this year. Skills policy is devolved, but as part of our defence boost we are seeing fantastic opportunities to bring colleges in Scotland along on that journey.”
“I gladly congratulate Newcastle and Stafford Colleges Group on its recent Ofsted rating, which is fantastic, and I note my hon. Friend’s support for its application to become a wave 2 technical excellence college. The applications closed on 16 February, and we expect to make and announce a decision next month.”
“I thank everyone for contributing to the debate, and for being prepared to share very personal and moving stories; I hope they feel that everyone in the Chamber was willing them on to do so. Again, I pay tribute and give deep thanks to the hon. Member for Edinburgh West for her passion and her continued campaigning in this area. I look forward to working with her in the future to make progress in this essential field.”
“Furthermore, during National Grief Awareness Week in December, Baroness Merron attended the annual meeting of the UKCB commissioners, which was chaired by the now Archbishop of Canterbury, Dame Sarah Mullally, to discuss progress on implementing the report’s recommendations and hear from adults and children with direct experience. In summary, bereavement will come to all of us—very sadly, for some it will be when they are still young and figuring out the world. I know that all those who have spoken today and the many experts and charities working in this area share a commitment to ensuring that every child is aware of and able to access the support that they need to navigate some of the most difficult times that they will ever experience.”
“We have continued to ensure that consideration of children remains a priority for the cross-Government bereavement working group, which is chaired by the Department of Health and Social Care and takes its membership from a broad range of Departments. The group meets quarterly and continues to consider options for improving services for all bereaved people, including bereaved children. The group was formed following the UK Commission on Bereavement report in 2022, “Bereavement is Everyone’s Business”. In November 2025, the UKCB steering group, including members from the Childhood Bereavement Network, attended a meeting of the cross-Government bereavement working group to share progress on its report’s recommendations and discuss further work.”
“To name just two that have not so far been mentioned, officials in my Department recently met representatives of Scotty’s Little Soldiers, which provides support to children and families of the armed services, and Sibling Support, a UK-wide charity providing critical help to children who suffer the heartbreaking loss of a sibling. Last year, we added new links to key gov.uk pages for those who have suffered a bereavement that previously included no reference to children. I thank the Childhood Bereavement Network for its support, with the Department, in ensuring that that happened. The shadow Education Secretary, the right hon. Member for Sevenoaks (Laura Trott), mentioned the importance of cross-Government working.”