House of Lords debate on SEN

[call me jaded]

I stumbled across this whilst channel hopping, been listening to it for a while now.

 

Part of Baroness Morris of Bolton's (Minister for Children & Families) speech lept out at me:

 

Further, we believe that those who know those pupils best?their parents?are entitled to help to choose the educational provision appropriate to those children's needs. Following the brave admission of the noble Baroness, Lady Warnock, that the concept of inclusion, of which she was the prime advocate, was the most disastrous legacy of her 1978 report and that some needs are more effectively met in separate institutions, there is now an overwhelming case, as many noble Lords have said, for an immediate, genuine and effective review of SEN provision and a moratorium on the closure of special schools until that is completed.

 

I say an effective review because the audit announced by the Government is demonstrably too narrow in its remit, confined as it is to pupils with severe learning difficulties, when the real problem arises with pupils with moderate learning difficulties who in so many cases are the casualties of the rigid and doctrinaire application of the policy of inclusion. That is why, in the absence of a proper review by the Government, my honourable friend David Cameron has announced that we are setting up a special needs commission, chaired by Sir Robert Balchin, a well known and enormously well regarded figure in the education world. There is one sole purpose to the commission: to find out what provision we must make for special educational need.

 

If an audit is to be of real value, it must consider several things. It must first inquire fully into the part played by LEAs in the closure of special schools to see why so many have closed and what procedures LEAs have been following in allocating places. It should also review the balance of the law on SEN provision, so that we can properly assess what effect the current bias in favour of inclusion has and whether it should be removed.

 

14 Jul 2005 : Column 1305

 

 

 

Parents' views matter. I am sure that we all agree on the need to support the families of pupils, who often find themselves under enormous strain. They know intimately the needs of their children?whether they are happy and whether those needs are being met. The audit should take due account of their views and address the concern that they are often left out of decisions affecting their own children.

 

The time has come to face reality. The Government tend to give the impression that all is well; that pupils are already receiving the care and support appropriate to their needs; that there is no covert agenda to promote inclusion whatever the cost; and that all that remains is to fine-tune a policy that is inspired in all material respects. The reality on the ground for many is very different, as we have heard from the moving speeches of my noble friends Lord Astor of Hever and Lord Pearson of Rannoch and the passionate speeches of my noble friends Lord Lucas, the noble Baroness, Lady Linklater, and the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones.

 

We also heard from the noble Baroness, Lady Uddin, about parents' concerns about statementing. We must take those concerns seriously, and they merit a response.

 

As the Down's Syndrome Association put it:

 

"Many [LEAs] are accused by parents of cynically manipulating the statementing process to deny adequate support to all but the most vocal".

 

 

The Parents Autism Campaign for Education has similarly found through its own survey that parents' perceptions of their LEAs were mostly negative, and that there is widespread belief that LEAs pay undue attention to budgetary issues when deciding what is best for pupils.

 

As the noble Lord, Lord Dearing, and the noble Baroness, Lady Sharp of Guildford, said, the proportion of children who are statemented differs markedly between LEAs. No wonder parents fear that budgetary issues are taking precedence over an objective assessment of each child's needs.

 

I agree with my noble friend Lady Shephard of Northwold. We need to build in greater flexibility so that the system accommodates a wide range of learning difficulties and meets the needs of those at the mild end of the spectrum, without conferring any form of stigma.

 

There is, too, a need to rebuild parents' trust in the system and give them the information that they need. They should not have to spend thousands of pounds commissioning their own reports on their children's conditions. To quote the Disability Rights Commission:

 

"Many parents of disabled children have little confidence that mainstream schools will provide a safe environment where children can reach their true potential".

 

 

Objective guidance might actually promote inclusion by reassuring the parents of those pupils for whom it is appropriate.

 

There is concern, too, at the lack of proper support for children with autism and emotional, behavioural and social difficulties. Inadequate provision has mean that there are 2,030 children with statements in pupil referral units, which suggests that the children with such needs are being failed.

 

14 Jul 2005 : Column 1306

 

 

 

Two-thirds of all exclusions involve students with special needs. One in five people of school age affected by autism is expelled from school and never returns. The cost to society of failing adequately to care for pupils with special educational needs is immense. It is surely essential that before we close more special schools we should review the operation and effects of the policy of inclusion.

 

In the memorable words of the noble Baroness, Lady Warnock, the idea of inclusiveness springs,

 

"from hearts in the right place".

 

 

For many, inclusion will be the answer, but the pendulum has swung too far. We believe passionately that special schools have a vital place in Britain. They provide patience with those who are struggling to learn, individual attention and special therapies, which give children who would otherwise be left behind the chance to thrive.

 

It is in the name of those children for whom the obstacles are many and the learning curve is steep that I welcome and support the debate.

 

5.8 pm

 

The full transcript makes a very long read, but startys here:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/l...#50714-15_head0

[oracle]

AIM is now awaiting the result of the audit mentioned in this debate. We fear that most children on the spectrum have not been included This will only make it even harder for parents to access service provision

 

Carole

[call me jaded]

Yes Carole I've been reading some of your posts with interest. It completely escaped my attention that the Tory's are setting up a 'commission', (though I'd noticed David Cameron):

 

Conservatives launch Special Needs Commission

 

Shadow Education Secretary David Cameron has announced the formation of a new commission to review the provision of special needs in the British education system.

 

The Special Needs Commission will be chaired by Sir Robert Balchin, and will "do what the Government's audit should do, but does not" and look into the whole spectrum of special needs provision.

 

Declared Mr Cameron: "This is not some new quango with woolly intentions and unclear purposes. The committee has one purpose, and one purpose only - to find out what provision we really need to make in the world of SEN."

 

After his repeated requests to the Government to investigate SEN provision were ignored, Mr Cameron added: "It is increasingly clear that there's a real need to look at the whole area of Special Needs in Education. There has been a huge growth in the number of children diagnosed with Special Needs. For example, our better understanding of autism has shown that, rather than five in every 10,000 children having autism, as was thought in 1980, the true number is 60 in every 10,000. But provision has not kept up with diagnoses."

 

He added: "There is growing concern about the statementing process, with parents finding it is too bureaucratic and too adversarial. And the closure of special schools also continues to cause widespread concern. The thrust of the Government's approach is that all but those children with the most severe disabilities and learning difficulties should be educated in mainstream schools. But this is leading to the closure of many schools for children with moderate learning disabilities, and is reducing choice for parents.

 

"I've repeatedly pressed the Government to review the law, to look again at the guidance issued to local authorities, to carry out a full audit of special schools rather than the limited one they're undertaking, and to stop closing special schools, at least until this audit is completed.

 

Other members of the SNC include Dr John Marks OBE (Secretary), Dr Andrew Povey, a Surrey County Councillor and one time education committee chairman; Brian Jones, until recently headmaster of Archbishop Tenison's School, Kennington Oval; Niels E Chapman, head teacher at Whitefield Schools and Centre, Walthamstow; Hugo Gerrard, solicitor, and father of a child with SEN; and Martin Turner, former chief psychologist at the Dyslexia Institute.

Edited September 4, 2005 by call me jaded

[Elanor]

I caught some of this whilst channel hopping too - I was surprised how rational and sensible the debate was, such a difference from the House of Commons. Shame there were so few other noble lords present to hear it all though ...

[forbsay]

My thoughts exactly!

[phasmid]

Jaded...I think I love you. Have been trying to find a link to this debate as it will be useful to refer to in my research paper.

Mwahh, Mwahh, Mwahh!

[call me jaded]

 

My self-esteem is suitably boosted

[UltraMum]

I'm going to quote part of this speech at a governor forum next week - our elected mayor is hell bent on closing two special schools, one of whic is autism specific - I'm going to ask the LEA to reconsider their position in light of this.

 

J asked me to put this rabbit in so here we go!

 

 

[call me jaded]

Not a tory council, by any chance?