School uniform suppliers have said that a parliamentary bill to regulate pupils' attire could increase inequality.
The private members' bill from Labour MP Mike Amesbury, which passed its second reading stage in Parliament today, seeks to give legal force to guidance on keeping down uniform costs.
The Schoolwear Association, which represents suppliers, said it supported placing the guidance on a statutory footing provided there were not any “unintended consequences”.
Opinion: Is it time to abandon the anachronistic school blazer?
News: Government backs bill to cut cost of school uniforms
Quick link: Is your school uniform sending out sexist messages?
It said that despite Mr Amesbury's claims that uniforms were too costly, the average cost of school-branded uniform and sportswear items in state secondaries was approximately only £100 at the outset, then an annual average cost around £36 as garments typically lasted longer than a school year.
The bill would require schools and governing bodies to make affordability central to their uniform policy, with an end to monopoly suppliers and a limit on the number of costly branded items.
Schools minister Nick Gibb said last month: “School uniforms should always be affordable and should not leave pupils or their families feeling that they cannot apply to a particular school.”
Association co-chair Matthew Easter said: “We support efforts to place uniform guidance for schools on a statutory footing to improve consistency across all schools and, provided this remains unchanged from its current form, we welcome Mike Amesbury’s Private Members' Bill.
“However, the implementation of the bill is critical to ensure that unintended consequences do not mean that the many benefits of school uniform are lost from our schools. There is universal acceptance across government and educational bodies that school uniform helps to create a strong school identity and ethos for learning, encourages higher behavioural standards and reduces bullying, not to mention the positive impact on equality and social cohesiveness in our schools.”
“That is why we will be supporting the progress of this bill through Parliament, in order to make our guidance on the cost considerations for school uniform statutory at the earliest opportunity."
The association's claim came after former teacher and Conservative MP Jonathan Gullis, writing in the Daily Express, argued that the bill would undermine the traditional school blazer.
Mr Gullis, who was a head of year at Fairfax Academy, Sutton Coldfield, before winning Stoke-on-Trent North at the general election, wrote: “The ubiquitous school blazer, tie and so much more are in the firing line.”
The MP – who is a member of the Commons Education Select Committee – was also concerned about the fate of small businesses that supply branded school clothing, which he said “would find it hard to compete and the availability of distinctive colours and badges would fall away”.
Writing on the NEU teaching union’s blog, Mr Amesbury said: “I have been accused of wanting to see the end of uniforms completely. The truth is quite the opposite.
“I believe in the good that uniforms can do in making pupils more equal and reducing the pressure to wear fashionable and expensive clothes. However, inflated prices for required, branded items of uniform undermine this principle.”
During the second reading today, Conservative MPs expressed concerns over the number of non-uniform days for school pupils.
Chris Green (Bolton West and Atherton) suggested a reduction may be required given such days seem to encourage competition and could undermine the value behind a school uniform.
Damien Moore (Southport) said “dress-up days” in schools caused additional pressures for families that have to keep finding different dressing-up outfits for their children.
