Two schools to lose hearing impairment units
Torbay Council's overview and scrutiny committee agreed to go ahead with the planned unit closures at St Margaret's Primary School and The Spires College.
Councillor Nick Bye, cabinet member for children's services, said the council commissioned 16 education health and care plan (EHCP) places, but only five children were in the placements.
Deputy director of local engagement at the National Deaf Children's Society, Martin Thacker, said deaf children would struggle without the support.
A petition against the plans gained more than 1,600 signatures and a protest was held in the town's centre ahead of the decision.
Mr Thacker added: "Without this support, deaf children can fall behind in lessons, struggle to build relationships with classmates, and experience low self-esteem and confidence.
"Hearing resource provisions are vital for the wellbeing of deaf children and mean they can thrive within mainstream schools alongside their hearing classmates."
Councillor Bye said the closures of the units would not lead to a "change in support".
"It's absolutely a continuation of support, it's no change to support, it's just the way we're funded," he said.
"There is a different funding model. Money will follow the individual pupil."
St Margaret's Academy previously said the council only counted children with an EHCP and not other hearing-impaired youngsters which it also supported.
Felicity Morris, secretary of the parent teachers association at St Margaret's, said the council was taking away specialist support "without meaningful or lawful consultation".
"Parents were not consulted," she said. "Qualified teachers of the deaf were excluded. The heads of both schools weren't asked. They were just told.
"This is not only morally wrong but also legally risky. It is not about buildings and budgets – it's about deaf children, and whether this council will stand by them.
"Don't close the doors on the only spaces where they are truly understood."
Councillor Bye said there were similar numbers of hearing impaired children attending other schools in the Bay, which do not have a hearing impairment unit.
"They flourish there. Surely with the great history and tradition at both St Margaret's and Spires they should be able to flourish there and I'm sure they will," he said.
The committee conceded the consultation and information could have been handled better.
Mr Thacker said the charity was considering its response to the council's decision.
More news stories for Devon
Listen to the latest news for Devon
Follow BBC Devon on X, Facebook and Instagram. Send your story ideas to spotlight@bbc.co.uk.
Anger at closure of school hearing impairment unit
National Deaf Charity's Society
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22-07-2025
- Yahoo
What are education and health care plans and why are parents worried about them being scrapped?
For children in England with special educational needs and disabilities, an education and health care plan (EHCP) is a central pillar of support. The government is due to set out its educational strategy for children with special educational needs and disabilities in the autumn, though, and has not ruled out scrapping ECHPs. Their removal would signal radical change in how the system works in England. ECHPs are individualised plans that set out the needs of a particular child and the support they should receive – from education, health services and social care – in order have the best opportunity to thrive. But demand for ECHPs is soaring and providing support is proving financially catastrophic for local authorities. One of the criticisms of EHCPs is that they prioritise providing children with individual models of support, rather than developing inclusive cultures within schools and within the broader education system. Education secretary Bridget Phillipson has outlined a vision of building a system where more children with special educational needs and disabilities can attend mainstream schools. But removing ECHPs leads to the possibility of children who need more specialist support missing out. Get your news from actual experts, straight to your inbox. Sign up to our daily newsletter to receive all The Conversation UK's latest coverage of news and research, from politics and business to the arts and sciences. To secure an ECHP, local authorities carry out a statutory assessment to determine whether a child's needs warrant additional support. An assessment does not always lead to an EHCP, but if one is issued, it must outline how the child's needs will be met and the additional resources needed to do so. These resources might include funding to provide a child with a teaching assistant, funding for equipment and transport to school, or funding to go to a specialist school. This system of support helps school leaders ensure that children and young people have the right support, at the right time. According to a report published earlier this year, the demand for EHCPs has risen by 140% since 2015. Recent data shows that there are 482,640 children and young people in England with an EHCP. Many more children have special educational needs, but do not have an ECHP. These pupils are classed as receiving special educational needs support. The percentage of pupils with an EHCP has increased to 5.3%, from 4.8% in 2024. The percentage of pupils with special educational needs support has increased to 14.2%, from 13.6% in 2024. Despite government investment of £10.7 billion to local authorities in 2024-25, a House of Commons committee report outlines that long waiting times for assessments, as well as to access support such as speech and language therapy, has led to parents losing confidence in the system. Funding is allocated to each local authority from central government to fund provision in their areas. It is for local authorities, in consultation with their schools, to determine the individual allocation to schools. However, local authorities are struggling to meet the increased demand for EHCPs. Even when funding is allocated through EHCPs, it is not always sufficient to address the needs of those with complex needs. And funding is not sufficient to meet demand. Local authorities have accumulated huge deficits due to spending exceeding funding, placing some at risk of going bankrupt. Future plans Bridget Phillipson has refused to be drawn on whether EHCPs will be axed. 'What I can say very clearly,' she has said, 'is that we will strengthen and put in place better support for children.' Building more inclusive schools is obviously one way of achieving this vision. If scrapping EHCPs means less funding for children for special educational needs and disabilities, though, this cannot be the answer. Children need more support, not less, to enable them to thrive. The solution is for the government to work out what models of inclusion work well in mainstream schools and to decide how these can be resourced and evaluated. Clarity is also needed on inclusion in mainstream schools can be measured in order to assess whether it is working. Making more support in mainstream schools work also requires an adequate supply of knowledgeable, well-trained teachers. The government is prioritising this through revision to initial teacher education courses, with an emphasis on all teachers being teachers of special educational needs. If the government doesn't get this right, the result may be poorer educational and long-term outcomes for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities. It may also lead to issues with teacher recruitment and retention in mainstream schools, particularly if teachers feel that they do not have the level of support in place that they need to meet the needs of their pupils. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Jonathan Glazzard does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Yahoo
Ministers fail to rule out cutting Send school plans after campaigners' concerns
Ministers have failed to rule out slashing education plans for children and young people with special educational needs, after campaigners warned against the move. Education minister Stephen Morgan insisted parents should have 'absolutely' no fear that support for children with special needs or disabilities (Send) will be scaled back. But he could not guarantee that the current system of education, health and care plans (EHCPs), which are issued to give children specialist classroom support, would remain in place. In a letter shared with the Guardian newspaper, campaigners have said that without the documents in mainstream schools, 'many thousands of children risk being denied vital provision, or losing access to education altogether'. On Monday, Mr Morgan told broadcaster LBC the current system of support is 'failing children, it's failing parents'. Asked if concerned campaigners could have no fear that Send support will be scaled back, Mr Morgan replied: 'Absolutely. What we want to do is make sure we've got a better system in place as a result of the reform that we're doing that improves outcomes for children with additional needs.' But pressed whether the reforms could include scrapping ECHPs, Mr Morgan replied: 'We're looking at all things in the round. 'I'm not going to get into the mechanics today, but this is about strengthening support for system.' On Sunday, Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson would similarly not be drawn on whether the plans will be retained. 'What I can say very clearly is that we will strengthen and put in place better support for children,' she told the BBC. The Government plans to publish a white paper in the autumn detailing how it will reform support for Send, according to Mr Morgan. Speaking in the Commons on Monday, Ms Phillipson said children with special needs will 'always' have a 'legal right' to additional support. She said: 'The guiding principle of any reform to the Send system that we will set out will be about better support for children, strengthened support for children and improved support for children, both inside and outside of special schools. 'Improved inclusivity in mainstream schools, more specialist provision in mainstream schools, and absolutely drawing on the expertise of the specialist sector in creating the places where we need them, there will always be a legal right… to the additional support… that children with Send need.' Requests for Send support have risen year-on-year. In total, there were 638,745 EHCPs in place in January 2025, up 10.8% on the same point last year. The number of new plans which started during 2024 also grew by 15.8% on the previous year, to 97,747. Requests for children to be assessed for EHCPs rose by 11.8% to 154,489 in 2024. In a letter to the Guardian, campaigners including the heads of charities, professors, Send parents including actor Sally Phillips, and campaigners including broadcaster Chris Packham warned against scrapping ECHPs as part of any overhaul of support. 'Whatever the Send system's problems, the answer is not to remove the rights of children and young people. Families cannot afford to lose these precious legal protections,' they said. MPs have warned ministers have not been clear about their plans, and could face a rebellion akin to last week's welfare Bill revolt, according to the Guardian. In a signal the Government is willing to square up to its rebellious backbenchers, Mr Morgan told ITV's Good Morning Britain that Labour MPs had 'stood on a platform a manifesto commitment to reform the Send system'. He also would not be drawn into suggestions by Good Morning Britain that the reforms were a cost-cutting measure being driven by the Treasury. 'Well, look at the figures. We've actually put more money into the Send system, the £1 billion for high needs announced last year,' he replied to the question. Amid mounting pressure from MPs to scrap the two-child benefit cap, the minister said 'nothing has changed' in the Government's plans, which will see a child poverty strategy report back in the autumn. Mr Morgan added: 'We're looking at all levers to bring down child poverty, but that's got to be fiscally done well, and obviously we need to grow our economy.' Liberal Democrat education spokeswoman Munira Wilson said: 'The Send system urgently needs fixing, but ministers mustn't use that as an excuse to balance the books on the backs of disabled children. 'The Government is ignoring the concerns of special needs families and campaigners, and is in serious danger of sleepwalking into another crisis – just like they did with the welfare Bill. 'Bridget Phillipson must listen to those concerns and come up with a proper solution that protects the most vulnerable in our communities, rather than throwing their support out the window.' During an adjournment debate on Send provision, Liberal Democrat MP Chris Coughlan said there are 'suicidal children with autism, who are repeatedly denied the support that is their right' in constituency of Dorking and Horley. Paul Whiteman, general secretary at school leaders' union NAHT, said: 'There is an unfair postcode lottery in the provision available depending on the financial position of local authorities and local health services, many of which suffered from years of underfunding under the previous government. 'The Government has recognised the need for reform, suggesting that, in future, mainstream schools could support more pupils with special educational needs. 'If this is to be achieved, access to quality staff Send training will be essential, and schools will need significantly improved funding and access to external support in order to ensure children consistently receive the provision they deserve.'
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- Yahoo
Before the government overhauls special educational needs, lessons must be learnt
Whatever else may be said about the government's plans for the education of children with special needs, they cannot be handled in the same, calamitous way as were the reforms to personal independence payments (PIP). As has been said with enormous force during the low-key commemoration of Labour's first year in office, lessons must be learnt. The education secretary, Bridget Phillipson, is the lead minister in preparing the schools white paper in October, which will include proposals for changes to the special needs framework. She has already caused some concern by refusing to rule out changing the system of education, health and care plans (EHCPs), and the rights groups and backbench MPs in her party have mobilised in response. In fairness, Ms Phillipson and her colleagues have talked about changes to EHCPs in the past. However, the recent welfare reform bill fiasco has both sharpened anxieties and bolstered the confidence of Labour backbenchers that they can defy the party leadership and block reform. The Labour general election manifesto was also oblique on this point. An element of fear, if not paranoia, has entered the debate, and Ms Phillipson's task has been much more difficult because of the mistakes made by her colleagues – Rachel Reeves as chancellor, Liz Kendall as work and pensions secretary, and the prime minister, Sir Keir Starmer. Ms Phillipson is one of the brighter stars in the Labour firmament, but she will be fortunate if she emerges from this process with an improved EHCP regime or her reputation enhanced. Trust has been eroded. For any government of any party, reforming the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) provision for children and young people presents particular challenges, and rightly so. These are among the most vulnerable of people, and they cannot be subject to discriminatory treatment, both as a matter of law and of morality. As a society, there is a duty to provide for children and young people with physical and learning disabilities, and to offer them the best start in life, maximising their independence and life chances. Their parents need and deserve support, and any failure to do so is unconscionable. In contrast to the PIP reforms, there must be no feeling that reform is solely or even primarily driven by the Treasury and the need for savings, though there is no escaping the financial realities. As Ms Reeves and Ms Kendall discovered to their cost, there are red lines that this generation of Labour MPs will not cross solely for the sake of meeting fiscal rules. Ms Phillipson, therefore, must win the arguments – and, as far as possible, carry all those concerned with her as she reshapes the regime and improves it. Therefore, the various groups representing SEND children and parents need to be closely involved in each stage of policy development. This is something she is now well placed to do, given recent events. In any case, because of what happened with PIP entitlements, she has no alternative. The parliamentary Labour Party, emboldened as it now is, will insist on being consulted. When the time comes to publish the white paper, there should be no nasty surprises. If there are, it will be just as doomed as the welfare reform bill. Secondly, this process cannot be rushed, or perceived to be rushed. The deadline of October for the schools white paper is a reasonable one but it should not take precedence over good policy. If the sections on SEND are not ready to be published, then they should be postponed. Indeed, there is a strong case for giving SEND policy a comprehensive study and white paper of its own, given the sensitivities and complexities involved. Again, the lesson of recent events is that a late policy is preferable to a bad policy. There is also a real need for a better understanding – entirely separate from the cost – of the merits of special schools or children's inclusion in the general school system, which will, of course, vary by individual cases. It is also wrong, as seems to be the case now, that variations in provision across different local authorities can be so stark – a postcode lottery. Thirdly, there does have to be some cognisance of the financial trends: why they are happening and how they will evolve. These are not all well understood even by the experts. Many more children are being given statutory rights under their hard-won EHCPs, but the reasons for the sharp increase of some 70 per cent in less than a decade are less transparent. Next year, the projected annual cost of support for children with learning difficulties or disabilities is set to reach £12bn. The system of finance also needs to be changed. At the moment, the costs of statutory SEND obligations are met by school managements and local authorities in the first instance, and they tend to squeeze other important, albeit less vital, priorities. This will put local councils into a large cumulative deficit of £8bn by 2027, according to the Institute for Fiscal Studies. In other words, more councils will go bust, which helps no one. It would be far more satisfactory if there were a national system of SEND funding based on consistent criteria. Finally – and, again, drawing on an important lesson – the system for SEND and EHCPs should be founded on a cross-party consensus. This, admittedly, is unlikely, but for obvious reasons it would help children and parents, as well as schools and local authorities, to plan ahead and avoid stigmatisation if those with special needs were 'weaponised' for political advantage. That may prove beyond Ms Phillipson's abilities, but she must surely know that she and her government cannot afford another such debacle. This time around, unlike Ms Kendall, she can remind Sir Keir and Ms Reeves of certain political realities.
