Can I thank the Member for her questions? Prior to making my announcement of my proposals for extending the summer term by a week, we had secured the agreement of the WLGA, and that proposal was endorsed by all 22 leaders and the directors of education. I was very clear—I think I did a webinar with teaching unions that very evening—that the fourth week would be a voluntary week. It goes above and beyond people's usual terms and conditions. We wanted to treat people fairly, hence offering the time in lieu in the October half term, and it would be a voluntary basis. Many staff and support workers, as well as headteachers, stepped up and were willing to maximise the opportunity for children. However, at a later date, local authorities expressed their concerns that they felt they were not able to secure a fourth week.

With regard to the unions, quite understandably the unions expressed concerns to me, not of the fourth week, although they wanted us to be clear it could only be done on a voluntary basis and we couldn't compel people to do that, and I was quite happy to acknowledge that. The main source of concerns from unions is about the decision to return to school before September. Many union leaders have expressed their desire that schools should not reopen until September, and I've made it very clear that that would leave such a significant gap and a significant amount of time without children being in school, that it was a huge source of concern to me. And given the scientific advice that it was safe to return to school prior to September, I felt it was absolutely necessary to embrace that opportunity and, where at all possible, to maximise the opportunity for children to check in with staff.