The education secretary has said children with special needs will “always” have a legal right to additional support as she sought to quell a looming row over potential cuts.

The government is facing a potential repeat of the debacle over welfare reform due to suggestions it could scrap tailored plans for children and young people with special needs in the classroom.

Politics latest: Minister says ‘those with broadest shoulders should pay more tax’

Speaking in the Commons on Monday, Bridget Phillipson failed to rule out abolishing education, health and care plans (EHCPs) – legally-binding plans to ensure children and young people receive bespoke support in either mainstream or specialist schools.

Laura Trott, the shadow education secretary, said parents’ anxiety was “through the roof” following reports over the weekend that EHCPs could be scrapped.

She said parents “need and deserve answers” and asked: “Can she confirm that no parent or child will have their right to support reduced, replaced or removed as a result of her planned changes?”

Ms Phillipson said SEND provision was a “serious and complex area” and that the government’s plans would be set out in a white paper that would be published later in the year.

“I would say to all parents of children with SEND, there is no responsibility I take more seriously than our responsibility to some of the most vulnerable children in our country,” she said.

“We will ensure, as a government, that children get better access to more support, strengthened support, with a much sharper focus on early intervention.”

ECHPs are drawn up by local councils and are available to children and young people aged up to 25 who need more support than is provided by the Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) budget.

They identify educational, health and social needs and set out the additional support to meet those needs.

In total, there were 638,745 EHCPs in place in January 2025 – up 10.8% on the same point last year.

‘Rebel ready’

One Labour MP said they were concerned the government risked making the “same mistakes” over ECHPs as it did with the row over welfare, when it was eventually forced into a humiliating climbdown in the face of opposition by Labour MPs.

“The political risk is much higher even than with welfare, and I’m worried it’s being driven by a need to save money which it shouldn’t be,” they told Sky News.

“Some colleagues are rebel ready.”

The MP said the government should be “charting a transition from where we are now to where we need to be”, adding: “That may well be a future without ECHPs, because there is mainstream capacity – but that cannot be a removal of current provision.”

Later in the debate, Ms Phillipson said children with special educational needs and disabilities would “always” have a “legal right” to additional support as she accused a Conservative MP of attempting to “scare” parents.

“The guiding principle of any reform to the SEND system that we will set out will be about better support for children, strengthened support for children and improved support for children, both inside and outside of special schools,” she said.

Read more:
Government to ban ‘appalling’ non-disclosure agreements
Government declines to rule out wealth tax

“Improved inclusivity in mainstream schools, more specialist provision in mainstream schools, and absolutely drawing on the expertise of the specialist sector in creating the places where we need them, there will always be a legal right … to the additional support… that children with SEND need.”

Her words were echoed by schools minister Catherine McKinnell, who also did not rule out changing ECHPs.

She told the Politics Hub With Sophy Ridge that the government was “focused on reforming the whole system”.

“Children and families have been left in a system where they’ve had to fight for their child’s education, and that has to change,” she said.

She added that EHCPs have not necessarily “fixed the situation” for some children – but for others it’s “really important”.

Victims will no longer have to “suffer in silence”, the government has said, as it pledges to ban non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) designed to silence staff who’ve suffered harassment or discrimination.

Accusers of Harvey Weinstein, the former film producer and convicted sex offender, are among many in recent years who had to breach such agreements in order to speak out.

Labour has suggested an extra section in the Employment Rights Bill that would void NDAs that are intended to stop employees going public about harassment or discrimination.

The government said this would allow victims to come forward about their situation rather than remain “stuck in unwanted situations, through fear or desperation”.

Zelda Perkins, Weinstein’s former assistant and founder of Can’t Buy My Silence UK, said the changes would mark a “huge milestone” in combatting the “abuse of power”.

She added: “This victory belongs to the people who broke their NDAs, who risked everything to speak the truth when they were told they couldn’t. Without their courage, none of this would be happening.”

Deputy prime minister Angela Rayner said the government had “heard the calls from victims of harassment and discrimination” and was taking action to prevent people from having to “suffer in silence”.

An NDA is a broad term that describes any agreement that restricts what a signatory can say about something and was originally intended to protect commercially sensitive information.

Currently, a business can take an employee to court and seek compensation if they think a NDA has been broken – even if that person is a victim or witness of harassment or discrimination.

“Many high profile cases” have revealed NDAs are being manipulated to prevent people “speaking out about horrific experiences in the workplace”, the government said.

Announcing the amendments, employment minister Justin Madders said: “The misuse of NDAs to silence victims of harassment or discrimination is an appalling practice that this government has been determined to end.”

The bill is currently in the House of Lords, where it will be debated on 14 July, before going on to be discussed by MPs as well.