Pupils punished for incorrect uniform due to cost pressures, charity warns
Nearly two in five (38%) parents said they struggle to pay for the school uniform their child needs, according to the poll for The Children's Society.
The survey, carried out by Censuswide in June, found 42% of parents said school uniform was not more affordable this year (2024/25) compared to the previous academic year (2023/24).
It comes as the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, which is currently being considered in the House of Lords, includes a proposal to cap the number of branded uniform items schools in England can require.
The survey found 44% of parents said their children have faced negative outcomes for wearing the incorrect uniform, or for not having a required item, as the uniform is unaffordable.
Around one in eight (12%) said their child had received a detention for uniform breaches, while 9% had been placed in isolation, and 8% had been excluded.
The poll found 15% of parents said their child had not been able to participate in lessons and 12% were not able to participate in extracurricular activities due to incorrect uniform.
Mark Russell, chief executive at The Children's Society, said: 'Punishing children for circumstances outside their control is deeply unjust.
'Every child should be able to attend school without fear of detention, isolation, or exclusion because of uniform costs their families cannot afford.'
Nearly four in five (78%) parents believe there should be a specific limit on the number of branded uniform items that schools can require, the survey found.
The charity is calling on the Government to implement proposals set out in the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill to introduce a limit of three branded items of school uniform to help families.
Mr Russell added: 'At a time when many families are already struggling to afford the basics, we can't let the cost of school uniforms make life even harder for children.'
Pepe Di'Iasio, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: 'The experiences reflected in this survey are worrying, and demonstrate just how tough the financial position is for some families who face having to make impossible decisions.
'Most schools – in our experience – are acutely conscious of cost pressures on families and work hard to support the many children in our country who live in difficult financial circumstances.
'We support the Government's intention of limiting the cost of uniforms – though we think this would be better achieved with a monetary cap rather than specifying the number of branded items that are allowed.'
Ahead of the committee stage debate on the Bill in the House of Lords on Thursday, schoolwear retailers have repeated warnings that the proposed cap of three branded school uniform items could increase costs for families.
Matthew Easter, chairman of the Schoolwear Association, said: 'We have repeatedly tried to engage with ministers in a constructive way to warn of the risks of this policy backfiring – harming the very families it's meant to help, and putting small community businesses and local jobs at risk.
'A blunt, one-size-fits-all cap will only drive-up costs and reduce access to essential support.'
Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson said: 'School uniforms can create a sense of community and belonging for children but they shouldn't cost the earth.
'Through our Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill we are capping the number of costly branded uniform items – putting money back into the pockets of working families as part of our Plan for Change.
'Whilst it might upset those who profit from branded items, it's clear from the Children's Society research that we have the backing of parents. It means schools can continue to benefit from a cohesive uniform, while parents can shop where suits their budget.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
35 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
ANDREW GRIFFITH: Almost four million people are signed off with no requirement to find a job. That's not fair on all the hard-working taxpayers who subsidise those languishing on benefits
If you ever wanted to know what the warning lights flashing red on the economy look like: this is it. Unemployment up for the tenth month in a row. Over a million more people on benefits in a year. Growth anaemic and borrowing through the roof. Labour is failing those who want a hand up whilst ramping up handouts like there's no tomorrow. Yesterday's jobs bloodbath shows Britain is approaching breaking point. Business can't take much more economic punishment from this Labour government all too happy to hand it out. But I fear worse is still to come. It's shocking that almost four million people of working age are on benefits with no requirement to find work. That is just not fair. Not fair to those people who will be languishing on benefits forever. And certainly not fair to the hard-working taxpayer who is subsidising their lifestyles. But Labour doesn't seem to have realised that if you want to get people off benefits, there need to be good jobs to go to. And it is only private businesses that can provide sustainable jobs: we cannot afford ever more public sector jobs propped up by unaffordable borrowing. But since taking office, this socialist government has waged all-out war on Britain's businesses. The manifesto-breaking, £25billion jobs tax punishes work and hits those trying to get their first job the most. No surprise that in yesterday's figures, it was in the 25 to 34-year-old age group where unemployment is growing the fastest. The family business death tax also means that those firms are now having to save up for a tax bill they can't afford – or simply decide to stop growing. And employers are bracing themselves for the 300-page job-killing Employment Rights Bill – the clue is not in the title – which is set to do the exact opposite of what it says on the tin. It will give unions the whip hand and take us back to the 1970s. Not a single real business supports it, but Labour doesn't care: its union paymasters cannot believe their luck. Anyone who hasn't fabricated their CV would be able to see the obvious outcome of this cacophony of incompetence is firms not hiring, the economy slowing and an explosion of people on benefits. And lo and behold – that is exactly what has happened. We warned them not to do it. They ignored us. Now we are warning them not to go ahead with even more tax rises. If they weren't going to listen before they should listen now that families are having to tighten their belts and jobs are being lost. But our beleaguered Chancellor has her head in the sand. Not one of her Budgets has lasted more than six months and she has just found out she has torn a £50billion black hole in the public finances. Whilst emergency spending cuts are what's needed, her Labour MPs are hungry for more tax and even more spending. Never mind this summer of discontent. Britain: unless this shower of a government is forced to change course, brace yourself for four more years of discontent.
Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Telegraph
Older workers are being sent to the scrapheap
At long last, Rachel Reeves has an economic success story. One sector in Britain is displaying dizzying growth, with demand soaring year on year: the number of people claiming Universal Credit without work requirements has risen from 2.7 million last July to 3.7 million. While some portion of this growth will be explained by migration between benefits as the Government shifts claimants to Universal Credit, that cannot be seen as exculpatory. Certain claimants moving on to Universal Credit from legacy benefits can do so without a need for any fresh reassessment of their ability to work. While this will help to streamline the transfer and ensure those who need support receive it, it is a missed opportunity to look at the existing group of claimants and to reassess their fitness for work. Such an approach is sorely needed. At the moment, attention is directed towards the flow of new claims for welfare, but relatively little towards tackling the stock of existing claims, and seeing whether some may have left the workforce prematurely. Attention, moreover, does not mean action. The furious row over the relatively minor changes to disability benefits proposed earlier this year resulted in a Government climbdown, and the emboldening of backbench rebels against further potential cuts. As a result, we continue to see the numbers parked on benefits with no requirement to seek work soar, with many older workers now in what appears to be a form of tacit early retirement. This is a waste of their talents and experience that Britain can ill afford, and one which is all the more infuriating given the lay of the land internationally. A little over a year ago, the Minneapolis Federal Reserve Bank published a fascinating analysis on the remarkable shifts in the US workforce, with significant rises in employment rates for the over 55s. Older Americans were better educated and healthier than previous generations, and as a result willing and able to work longer. In Britain, in contrast, we are facing a health and disability benefits bill expected to rise to £100bn a year by the end of the decade, with minimal means of shifting workers off claims once they begin. It would be greatly to the benefit of the nation and the public finances if Westminster could bring itself to learn from Washington in this field.
Sky News
5 hours ago
- Sky News
Is Keir Starmer falling into a small boats trap?
As a milestone is reached of 50,000 migrants crossing the Channel since he became prime minister, Keir Starmer finds himself in a familiar place - seemingly unable to either stop the boats, or escape talking about them. Home Office data shows 50,271 people made the journey since the election last July, after 474 migrants arrived on Monday. This is around 13,000 higher than the comparable period the previous year. Starmer has tweeted more than 10 times about this issue in the past week alone, more than any other. On Monday he wrote on X: "If you come to this country illegally, you will face detention and return. If you come to this country and commit a crime, we will deport you as soon as possible." It could be a tweet by a politician of any party on the right - and many voters (and Labour MPs) will say it's right that the prime minister is taking this issue seriously. Illegal - or irregular - migration is a relatively small proportion of total migration. Net migration was down at 431,000 in 2024 which the OCED say is comparable to other high-income countries. But it is of course highly visible and politically charged. Nigel Farage's Reform party have had a busy few months campaigning on it, and the prime minister has been toughening up his language in response. Shortly after the local elections in May in which Reform won hundreds of seats and took control of councils, Starmer made his speech in which he warned: "In a diverse nation like ours, without fair immigration rules, we risk becoming an island of strangers." It outraged some in his own party, and he later said he regretted that language. But it was part of a speech which made clear that he wanted action - vowing to end "years of uncontrolled migration" in a way "that will finally take back control of our borders and close the book on a squalid chapter for our politics." It's a long way from his early months as Labour leader in 2020 when he said: "We welcome migrants, we don't scapegoat them." Migration did not feature as one of his five missions for "change" at the general election. The strategy by Starmer and his minister is to talk up forthcoming new measures - a crackdown on social media adverts by traffickers, returns of people without a right to be in the UK which are indeed higher than under the Conservatives, and last week, a "one in, one out" deal with France to send people back across the channel. The government say some people have been detained, although it is not known when these returns will happen. Ministers are also still pointing the finger at the previous Conservative government - which found stopping the boats easy to say and hard to achieve. Baroness Jacqui Smith, a former home secretary, said this morning: "I don't think it was our fault that it was enabled to take root. We've taken our responsibility to work internationally, to change the law, to improve the way in which the asylum system works, to take through legislation to strengthen the powers that are available. "The last government did none of those things and focused on gimmicks. And it's because of that, that the crime behind this got embedded in the way which it did. And that won't be solved overnight." But for a prime minister who appears to have come to this issue reluctantly, talking about it a lot - and suggesting he'll be judged on whether he can tackle it - risks raising expectations. Joe Twyman, of the pollsters Deltapoll said: "You cannot simply out-Farage Nigel Farage when it comes to the subject of immigration. In a sense, Labour is falling into precisely the same trap that the Conservatives fell into. They're giving significant prominence to a subject where they don't have much control". Starmer has avoided mentioning firm numbers on how many migrants his crackdown may stop, but as previous prime ministers have found with the difficult issue of controlling migration, if you ask to be judged on delivery, voters will do so.
