Record numbers of fines are being issued to parents in England and Wales for taking children on term-time holidays, with 459,288 penalties handed out last year. A national survey released this month found that over 2 million parents—around a fifth—have taken children out of school because they could not afford holiday travel during peak times. Columnist Rhiannon Lucy Cosslett argues that abolishing these fines would ease financial pressures on families, reduce social inequality, and support children's wellbeing.
Why the fines are unfair and ineffective
Cosslett, a Guardian columnist, contends that the fines disproportionately affect low-income families, those with children with special educational needs and disabilities (Send), and workers in seasonal industries such as farming, the military, and tourism. She notes that parents in wealthier areas often simply budget for the fine, creating a two-tier system where the penalty is a minor cost for some but a significant burden for others.
The fines also fail to deter, she says, describing the widespread non-compliance as "mass civil disobedience." Unlike Scotland and Northern Ireland, England and Wales impose automatic fines, yet many parents still choose to take their children away during term time, reflecting a passionate public belief in the value of family holidays.
Educational impact and the nanny state
While acknowledging that school attendance is important, Cosslett argues that one authorised term-time holiday per year, at the headteacher's discretion, would not necessarily harm learning. She points to record school refusal rates and a crumbling Send system as more urgent issues affecting educational outcomes. She also criticises the coalition government's punitive approach to unauthorised absences, noting that many politicians who supported the rules were privately educated and sent their children to fee-paying schools where term-time holidays are permitted.
Cosslett, a self-described socialist who supports the "nanny state," still sees the fines as an overreach. She suggests that the rules are paternalistic and fail to account for families who cannot afford peak-time travel or who have children with sensory or mobility issues that make crowded holiday periods difficult.
Economic and wellbeing benefits
Beyond the immediate cost savings, Cosslett highlights the long-term benefits of family holidays for children's mental health and wellbeing. She recalls her own childhood, where holidays were rare due to financial constraints, and argues that time away from school pressures can strengthen family bonds and create lasting memories. "Value to taxpayers is often mentioned in these discussions," she writes, "but the wellbeing and mental health benefits for children can be economic as well as holistic."
Cosslett also suggests that holidays need not be "educational" in a formal sense. Simple activities like swimming, trying new foods, and seeing parents relax can be valuable experiences that support children's development and resilience.
A political opportunity for Labour
Cosslett sees this as a potential vote-winner for Labour, specifically for Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham. She argues that abolishing the fines would align with his stated commitment to alleviating the cost-of-living crisis and allowing families to enjoy life. She also proposes complementary measures, such as penalising travel companies that inflate prices during school holidays and staggering or shortening the summer break, along with providing proper childcare options.
By addressing a source of social inequality and easing financial pressures on families, Cosslett believes this policy could secure electoral support. "It's an open goal for Burnham," she concludes, urging him to act on a change that would resonate with many parents across the country.
