🍎 Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill (Seventh sitting)

• Free Breakfast Club Provision: The Committee discussed amendments to Clause 21 of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which aims to introduce free breakfast clubs in state-funded primary schools in England. The amendment clarifies that the duty does not include community or foundation special schools established in hospitals.

• Implementation and Funding: The government plans to start with 750 early adopter schools from April 2025 to test the implementation and funding of the breakfast clubs. The national roll-out will be informed by the experiences of these early adopters, and funding will be subject to future spending reviews.

• Benefits of Breakfast Clubs: The Minister emphasized the benefits of breakfast clubs, such as improving attendance, attainment, and behavior. The clubs are seen as a way to give all children a great start to the school day, regardless of their backgrounds.

• Concerns and Amendments: Concerns were raised about the universality of the provision and its impact on different groups of students. Amendments were proposed to require reports on the current state, costs, and staffing needs for breakfast clubs, and to ensure funding for secondary schools.

• Secondary Schools and Deprived Areas: There was discussion about extending breakfast club funding to secondary schools in deprived areas, with some members suggesting that resources should be targeted at those most in need rather than a universal approach.

• School Uniforms: The Committee also discussed Clause 23, which aims to limit the number of branded items in school uniforms to reduce costs for families. Concerns were raised about potential negative impacts on costs and the level of prescription in legislation.

• VAT and School Uniforms: Proposals were made to make certain items of school uniform zero-rated for VAT, highlighting the need to reduce financial burdens on families.

• Second-Hand Uniforms: New clauses were proposed to encourage schools to make second-hand uniforms available to further reduce costs for parents.

• Monitoring and Compliance: The government plans to monitor the effectiveness of the breakfast club program and ensure compliance with school food standards through existing mechanisms and potential future initiatives.

• Future Considerations: The debate on school uniforms and breakfast clubs reflected a broader discussion on how to support families while ensuring educational standards and financial sustainability.

The session displayed a moderate level of disagreement among the participants, primarily focused on policy details and implementation of the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill, specifically Clause 21 on breakfast club provision and Clause 23 on school uniforms. While there is consensus on the goals of reducing the cost of uniforms and improving children’s nutrition through breakfast clubs, the disagreements lie in the specific measures and their potential impacts.

1. Breakfast Clubs (Clause 21):
   • Disagreement on Targeting and Universal Provision: Neil O’Brien (Conservative) and Munira Wilson (Liberal Democrat) questioned the universality of the breakfast club program, suggesting it might be more effective to target it towards more disadvantaged schools. Stephen Morgan (Education Under-Secretary) defended the universal approach, emphasizing the wide-ranging benefits for all primary school children.
   • Concerns Over Practicality and Funding: Munira Wilson raised concerns about the practical delivery of breakfast clubs in small rural schools and the need for adequate funding. Stephen Morgan acknowledged the concerns and detailed the plans for the early adopter phase to address such issues.
   • Duration and Costs: There were questions about the 30-minute minimum duration of the breakfast clubs and whether this would meet parental needs. Neil O’Brien highlighted the potential complexity if schools already offer longer breakfast sessions and the need for clarity on funding and costs as outlined in Amendments 26 and 27.
2. School Uniforms (Clause 23):
   • Number of Branded Items: Neil O’Brien criticized the clause for micromanaging schools by specifying the number of branded uniform items. He suggested that this might not effectively reduce costs and could lead to unintended consequences, such as an increase in expensive branded sportswear.
   • Cost vs. Number of Items: Munira Wilson proposed a cost cap rather than a limit on the number of items, arguing that such an approach would prevent overpricing of branded items. This was a point of contention with the current legislation’s approach.
   • Exemptions and Specifics: There were differing views on whether items like sports team kits and PE kits should be exempt from the branded item limit. Amendments proposed by Neil O’Brien to exempt these items from the cap highlighted the disagreement over the practical implications of the policy.
   • Micromanagement Concerns: Damian Hinds and Neil O’Brien expressed frustration at the level of detail being written into primary legislation, suggesting that schools should be trusted to manage uniform costs through existing statutory guidance.

The disagreement primarily revolves around the method and practicality of implementing these policies rather than the policies’ intent. The debates often focused on the potential unintended consequences of the legislated approach, indicating a disagreement on the most effective and fair way to achieve the desired outcomes. The level of disagreement was moderate, hence the rating of 3.