Children with special educational needs at risk of losing legal right to school support
Hundreds of thousands of children with special needs are at risk of losing their legal entitlement to support in schools, as the government refused to rule out scrapping key documents that families rely on to guarantee specialist support.
Education, health and care plans (EHCPs) are statutory documents which outline the support needed to help children with special needs and disabilities achieve key life outcomes.
But speaking to the Guardian, Catherine McKinnell, the school standards minister, declined to rule out narrowing or replacing EHCPs altogether as she confirmed officials were developing a new system for SEND support.
Campaigners have warned such a move could force thousands of pupils out of mainstream education, accusing the government of an 'assault on disabled people' in the wake of sweeping welfare cuts which are expected to impact as many as 800,000 disabled people.
Asked whether ministers would scrap or restrict EHCPs, Ms McKinnell said: 'No decisions have been taken yet on how we deliver …. The change we want to see is just better support for children at the earliest stage possible. And clearly the system we've inherited is not delivering that'.
She added: 'Parents have a real battle to get support that should be ordinarily available in school.'
Pressed on the issue, Mrs McKinnell responded: 'I think parents would agree that if we had a well-functioning system, if we had that good early support, then you wouldn't need a complex legal process to access an education.
'Even when families secure an EHCP, it doesn't necessarily deliver the education that's been identified … We're listening to parents. We're working on a new system. It's not fixed yet.'
Such a change would provoke significant backlash from campaigners and parents, as without an EHCP, schools in England have no legal obligation to meet a child's specific needs.
Ms McKinnell's remarks come after a report from the National Audit Office, published last year, warned that the SEND system was financially unsustainable, with the number of EHCPs having increased by 140 per cent since 2015.
Earlier this month, Dame Christine Lenehan, the Department for Education's strategic adviser on SEND, admitted the government is looking at whether or not EHCP's are the 'right vehicle' for special educational support.
Reacting to Ms McKinnell's remarks, Katie Ghose, chair of the Disabled Children's Partnership, told the Guardian: 'Hundreds of thousands of children rely on these plans to go to school safely and learn. This would represent a fundamental break from four decades of political consensus that disabled children need legal guarantees to access education.
'Without that, the government risks sending more children out of school and into a system where their needs are simply not met.'
Tania Tirraoro, the co-director of Special Needs Jungle, warned that campaigners will not 'accept the removal of disabled children's rights without a fight', accusing Labour of an 'entire assault on disabled people of all ages'.
It comes amid growing disquiet over the government's controversial decision to restrict personal independence payments for around 800,000 people, a key benefit which helps pay for the extra costs of living with a disability, as part a wider programme of welfare cuts.
There is deep concern over the impact of the proposed changes from both Labour MPs and ministers with as many as 150 backbenchers gearing up to rebel over the proposals.
Speaking about EHCPs, Ms Tirraoro added: 'This isn't about improving provision – it's about saving money. If EHCPs are taken away from mainstream settings, early years and 16- to 25-year-olds outside special schools will lose protection too. That will push more children into special schools, alternative provision, or out of education entirely.'
A Department for Education spokesperson said: 'The evidence is clear that this government inherited a SEND system left on its knees – with too many children not having their needs met and parents forced to fight for support.
'This government is actively working with parents and experts on the solutions, including more early intervention to prevent needs from escalating and £740 million to encourage councils to create more specialist places in mainstream schools.
'Any changes we make will improve support for children and parents, stop parents from having to fight for support, and protect provision currently in place. As part of our Plan for Change, we will restore the confidence of families up and down the country and deliver the improvement they are crying out for so every child can achieve and thrive.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
19 minutes ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on Labour's tough choices: they are costing the government dearly
The Labour government's abrupt U-turn on winter fuel payments – restoring the benefit to more than three-quarters of pensioners – reveals less a change of heart than a sobering realisation in Westminster: after years of austerity, the public no longer gives politicians the benefit of the doubt. The irony is hard to miss. Labour set out to prove that 'grown-up' economics means difficult decisions – only to find that once trust is lost, voters won't accept vague promises without tangible results. It turns out many are sceptical that sacrifices will produce better results for society. That's why ministers are struggling to justify cuts to disability benefits as a way to 'fund' public services – or to convince the public that Britain can't afford to lift the two-child benefit cap even as ministers claim they will reduce child poverty. There may be more conspicuous retreats ahead for the government. Sir Keir Starmer and his chancellor, Rachel Reeves, had wanted a series of symbolic breaks with Labour's traditional base to prove that only by making tough choices could they deliver £113bn in new public investment. Instead, the last year has become a cautionary tale: ministers elected to repudiate Tory austerity are now seen to be replicating it – and voters have noticed, with Labour's poll numbers sliding as a result. In such a climate, appeals to fiscal rectitude don't receive gratitude but suspicion. The government's volte-face over pensioner benefits only reinforces the sense it was driven by a backlash, not conviction. This dynamic isn't new but it has radically reshaped Labour's own base – and should be a warning to the party for its future. Working-class voters once formed Labour's backbone; now many vote for no one at all. This isn't about lacking education or income. Throughout the postwar decades, working-class turnout matched that of the middle classes. As Geoffrey Evans and James Tilley of Oxford University wrote in their book The New Politics of Class, the drop came only when their political representation vanished. As parties converged and Labour abandoned its working-class roots, political choice disappeared. Labour's traditional base didn't stop voting because they couldn't – they stopped because there was nothing left to vote for. Brexit reshaped politics, but not as radically as many claim. Today's class politics has been built on culture wars and channelled through identity and belonging. The warning by the former Bank of England chief economist Andy Haldane that Nigel Farage is now seen by many as the closest thing Britain has to a 'tribune for the working class' should be taken seriously. Citing Reform UK's surge in the polls, he pointed to a 'moral rupture' between voters and mainstream politicians, accusing Labour of fuelling disillusionment through a weak growth strategy and unpopular decisions on benefits. While not declaring Reform the definitive working-class party, Mr Haldane stressed that what matters is perception – and right now, many working-class voters believe Mr Farage speaks for them more than anyone else. Labour's spending review this week looks like an attempt to reframe its offer around extra cash for frontline services such as health and education. That is welcome. Less so will be the real-terms cuts in unprotected departments that Ms Reeves's fiscal rules demand to account for such commitments. If this reset is not visible and felt by voters soon, the door swings open wider to Mr Farage and his hard-right politics.
Telegraph
20 minutes ago
- Telegraph
BBC bosses in talks about how to win over Reform-voting viewers
BBC bosses are holding talks about how to win over Reform-voting viewers amid fears their views are under-represented by the broadcaster. Senior executives including director-general Tim Davie and chairman Samir Shah have discussed plans to overhaul the BBC's news and drama output to tackle 'low-trust issues' among Reform voters. At a meeting of the corporation's editorial guidelines and standards committee in March, Deborah Turness, BBC News boss, gave a presentation on how to ensure the views of Reform voters were being given enough airtime. Changes under consideration included altering which news stories the broadcaster covers, as well as potential changes to how it commissions other forms of programming including drama. The committee, which counts former GB News adviser Sir Robbie Gibb as a member, also discussed the importance of local BBC teams. The BBC is understood to be keen to ensure it represents all audiences and their concerns, suggesting the broadcaster may look to boost its coverage of issues such as immigration. Insiders said there was also a focus on making sure that all viewers, experiences and backgrounds are portrayed on screen in entertainment shows. The committee is expected to update on its progress in luring Reform voters at a future meeting. Minutes from the meeting, first reported by Byline Times, stated: 'The CEO, News and Current Affairs provided the Committee with a presentation on plans to address low-trust issues with Reform voters. 'The Committee discussed the presentation. Committee members recognised the importance of local BBC teams in the plan, given their closeness to audiences. 'Directors discussed how story selection and other types of output, such as drama, also had a role to play.' It comes amid concerns that an increasing number of Reform-voting viewers are switching off from the BBC. A recent YouGov poll found that Reform voters have significantly less trust in institutions than supporters of other parties. Question Time's most-used guest Just 13pc of Reform voters said they had a great deal or a fair amount of trust in the BBC, well below the average of 42pc. In contrast, 55pc of Reform supporters said they trusted GB News, which counts Nigel Farage as a presenter. Mr Farage has repeatedly attacked the BBC, describing it as 'institutionally biased' and 'out-of-touch'. In a manifesto last year, he vowed to scrap the licence fee should his party be elected. Despite this, he has been a regular contributor to the broadcaster. The Reform leader made his 38th appearance on Question Time at the end of last year, making him the show's most regular living guest. Only Charles Kennedy, the former Lib Dem leader, appeared on the programme more times. The shake-up comes at a turbulent time for Reform, which has seen its popularity surge in recent months and is now ahead of both the Labour and Conservative parties in polling. Over the weekend, Zia Yusuf announced he was returning as party chairman just two days after he quit in spectacular fashion. He insisted his decision to step down had been 'born of exhaustion'. The BBC has previously sought the view of audiences on what it should be covering. During last year's election it launched a feedback campaign dubbed 'Your Voice, Your Vote', which led to it covering stories such as electricity pylons and rural bus services. The discussions come as BBC bosses are locked in negotiations with ministers over the future of the licence fee funding model, which is up for debate ahead of the end of the current Charter period in 2027. A BBC spokesman said: 'Our Royal Charter requires us to reflect and represent all the communities of the UK, and our Editorial Guidelines require that we must take account of the different political parties with electoral support across the UK to achieve due impartiality.'
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
Labour MPs in call for benefits U-turn after change to winter fuel payment cut
Labour backbenchers have called for a Government U-turn on planned disability benefit cuts, after Chancellor Rachel Reeves restored winter fuel payments to a majority of pensioners. Ms Reeves' £1.25 billion plan unveiled on Monday will see automatic payments worth up to £300 given to pensioners with an income less than £35,000 a year. It followed last year's decision to strip pensioners of the previously universal scheme, unless they claimed certain benefits, such as pension credit. Nadia Whittome, the Labour MP for Nottingham East, warned ministers they risked making a 'similar mistake' if they tighten the eligibility criteria for personal independence payments, known as Pip. Leeds East MP Richard Burgon called on pensions minister Torsten Bell to 'listen now' so that backbenchers can help the Government 'get it right'. In her warning, Ms Whittome said she was not asking Mr Bell 'to keep the status quo or not to support people into work' and added: 'I'm simply asking him not to cut disabled people's benefits.' The pensions minister, who works in both the Treasury and Department for Work and Pensions, replied that the numbers of people receiving Pip is set to 'continue to grow every single year in the years ahead, after the changes set out by this Government'. In its Pathways to Work green paper, the Government proposed a new eligibility requirement, so Pip claimants must score a minimum of four points on one daily living activity, such as preparing food, washing and bathing, using the toilet or reading, to receive the daily living element of the benefit. 'This means that people who only score the lowest points on each of the Pip daily living activities will lose their entitlement in future,' the document noted. Mr Burgon told the Commons: 'As a Labour MP who voted against the winter fuel payment cuts, I very much welcome this change in position, but can I urge the minister and the Government to learn the lessons of this and one of the lessons is, listen to backbenchers? 'If the minister and the Government listen to backbenchers, that can help the Government get it right, help the Government avoid getting it wrong, and so what we don't want is to be here in a year or two's time with a minister sent to the despatch box after not listening to backbenchers on disability benefit cuts, making another U-turn again.' Mr Bell replied that it was 'important to listen to backbenchers, to frontbenchers'. Opposition MPs cheered when the minister added: 'It's even important to listen to members opposite on occasion.' Liberal Democrat MP Mike Martin warned that 'judging by the questions from his own backbenchers, it seems that we're going to have further U-turns on Pip and on the two-child benefit cap'. The Tunbridge Wells MP asked Mr Bell: 'To save his colleagues anguish, will he let us know now when those U-turns are coming?' The minister replied: 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Labour Government bringing down child poverty, and that's what we're going to do 'What Labour MPs want to see is a Government that can take the responsible decisions, including difficult ones on tax and on means testing the winter fuel payment so that we can invest in public services and turn around the disgrace that has become Britain's public realm for far too long.' Conservative former work and pensions secretary Esther McVey had earlier asked whether the Chancellor, 'now that she and the Government have got a taste for climbdowns', would 'reverse the equally ridiculous national insurance contribution (Nic) rises, which is destroying jobs, and the inheritance tax changes, which is destroying farms and family businesses'. Mr Bell said: 'This is a party opposite that has learned no lessons whatsoever, that thinks it can come to this chamber, call for more spending, oppose every tax rise and expect to ever be taken seriously again – they will not.' Labour MP Rebecca Long-Bailey pressed the Government to make changes to the two-child benefit cap, which means most parents cannot claim for more than two children. 'It's the right thing to do to lift pensioners out of poverty, and I'm sure that both he and the Chancellor also agree that it's right to lift children out of poverty,' the Salford MP told the Commons. 'So can he reassure this House that he and the Chancellor are doing all they can to outline plans to lift the two-child cap on universal credit as soon as possible?' Mr Bell replied: 'All levers to reduce child poverty are on the table. 'The child poverty strategy will be published in the autumn.' He added: 'If we look at who is struggling most, having to turn off their heating, it is actually younger families with children that are struggling with that. 'So she's absolutely right to raise this issue, it is one of the core purposes of this Government, we cannot carry on with a situation where large families, huge percentages of them, are in poverty.'
