I beg to move,

That leave be given to bring in a Bill to make provision about access to matured child savings accounts in the name of a young person who lacks capacity;
to require the Secretary of State to review savings provision for children and young people with disabilities including those who lack capacity;
and for connected purposes.

Madam Deputy Speaker, I want to tell you about a family. When Mikey Turner was born, his parents did what so many parents do. They saved for him—not much; a little here, a little there—because they loved their son and they wanted to give him the best chance in life. They put money into a child trust fund, the Government savings account that existed for children born between 2002 and 2011, topped up with £500 of public money as a foundation for every child’s future. However, what they did not know at the time was that Mikey would grow up to have profound disabilities. He lacks the mental capacity to manage money independently. When his child trust fund matured on his 18th birthday, something absurd happened: the money that his family had saved for him, because of him and out of love for him, was, in effect, locked away. His parents, who have cared for Mikey every single day of his life, who are recognised by the Department for Work and Pensions as his appointees, who manage his benefits and who make decisions on his behalf, were told that they could not practically access their own child’s savings account. Instead, they were pointed towards the Court of Protection.

The Court of Protection exists for good reasons, but we are talking about a process that can take over a year, cost hundreds of pounds in fees, require lengthy medical assessments, and demand a level of legal navigation and sophistication that would daunt even the most confident of us. This is a family seeking access to a few thousand pounds saved in their own child’s account. For a family already stretched by the daily demands of caring for a severely disabled child, this is, frankly, an injustice.

Mikey’s father, Andrew Turner, is my constituent. It is six years since Mikey’s 18th birthday, and for all that time, Andrew has campaigned on this issue, both for himself and for all the other affected families. In that time, he has had to make his case 10 different times to 10 different Justice Ministers, seven Conservative and three Labour—with perhaps another coming soon, although I hope not. Such is the churn in ministerial positions. OneFamily and Contact have supported him throughout, and I want to thank Una Summerson and Maria Scholey at Contact for everything that they have contributed. Together, Andrew, the industry and campaigners have brought this Bill to the House, and the strength of support for it from across Parliament speaks for itself.

Andrew’s is far from being the only such case. An estimated 80,000 disabled young people face, or will face, this same barrier, and that number can only grow, because junior individual savings accounts, the successor to child trust funds, will begin to mature before the end of the decade. Junior ISAs have the same fatal flaw, and some children with junior ISAs will also, sadly, grow up to be unable to manage their affairs. If we take no action, we will see the injustice repeat itself, but on an even greater scale.

There is an extra twist. Many families have been told that while the money remains inaccessible to them, its existence can disqualify their child from any entitlement to benefits. Heads you lose, tails you lose. This is a scandal that must not be allowed to continue. These are not families trying to access large estates, or complex financial portfolios. They are parents who have saved a few hundred or a few thousand pounds because they believed in their child’s future—and I stress that this is not a demand for Government compensation; it is families’ own money.

What makes this so frustrating is that a solution already exists. A number of financial institutions—OneFamily, Nationwide, Santander and Foresters Financial—already operate their own processes, using evidence of Department for Work and Pensions appointeeship and appropriate safeguards, to release these funds to families. They have helped thousands of families to access millions of pounds. However, they need a proper legal framework; without one, not every financial institution is willing to act.

I acknowledge that Ministers and officials are engaging seriously with this issue. A meeting has been convened for 8 July. It will bring together the Government, the finance industry, charities and campaigners to work towards a solution, and that is very welcome. I want to particularly recognise Sarah Sackman, who was a real champion for Andrew and families like his during her time on this brief. I am glad that the noble Minister who now holds the brief has continued that work and understands that this issue will not go away, but engagement is not legislation. Warm words, however sincerely meant, will not unlock a savings account.

This Bill asks for something straightforward: it asks the Government to establish a clear, proportionate and statutory route, so that a parent in Horsham gets the same answer from their bank as a parent in Harrogate. It asks that protection does not become prevention, and it asks for a review of wider savings provision for disabled children, because the principle at stake—that disabled young people should be able to save on equal terms as the rest of us—matters, and goes beyond this one scheme.

Andrew Turner has fought for six years for his son Mikey, and he is far from the only one. Claire Stockton waited more than a year and navigated a complex court process, all for the sake of a modest £1,000 in savings belonging to her disabled child. Another parent, Michele Creed, was able to access the savings, but has been obliged to take on the responsibility and bureaucracy of ongoing financial deputyship. This is crazy. The child trust fund is her daughter’s only asset. Only the most skilful and determined families will ever find their way through this legal quagmire.

I respect the high amount of protection for trust funds. I understand that senior lawyers are reluctant to make an exception, even in a case like Mikey’s, and that this reluctance has frustrated 10 successive Ministers so far, but I repeat that this is not the Government’s money; it is the Turners’ money. When Andrew first approached a lawyer for help, he was told that all he could do was wait for Mikey to die, and then he could access the fund. That is absolutely unacceptable. These families had already cared for a disabled child, at great personal sacrifice, for 18 years by the time they realised that they could not access the fund. The mere suggestion that parents might abuse their position and spend the money on themselves is appalling, yet that is the implied position of the law.

Thousands of families are waiting. The solutions are before us. The industry is ready. The cross-party support is here. What is needed now is for the Government to act—not to review further, or to consult again. If they need legislation, let this Bill be it. I know that the chances of a ten-minute rule Bill making it into law are vanishingly slim, but the Government can make it happen, if they wish. Families have waited long enough. I commend this Bill to the House.

Question put and agreed to.

Ordered,

That John Milne and Ed Davey present the Bill.

John Milne accordingly presented the Bill.

Bill read the First time; to be read a Second time on Friday 29 January 2027, and to be printed (Bill 106).