Before a rethink of special educational needs, 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, according to The Independent.
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.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Middle East Eye
a day ago
- Middle East Eye
Israeli air force chief who oversees Gaza strikes visits UK
Israel's air force chief has landed in Britain for a conference hosted by the Royal Air Force. Major General Tomer Bar has been in position throughout Israel's war on Gaza, and from April this year has reportedly personally approved air strikes carried out by the Israeli air force. He landed on Thursday afternoon and is reportedly in the UK to attend the Royal International Air Tattoo event, which is held at a Royal Air Force base in Gloucestershire. The major event at RAF Fairford, which features air shows and aircraft displays, began on Friday morning and will last until Sunday. According to Israeli public broadcaster Kan, Bar will have a series of meetings with air force commanders from around the world. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters In April this year, Bar warned Israeli air force reservists not to sign a letter criticising the war on Gaza, telling them they would be dismissed from service if they did so. A UN-backed report on Tuesday found that 10 children a day are losing one or both limbs in Gaza due to Israel's assault on the Palestinian enclave. According to the Gaza health ministry, more than 17,000 of the 58,573 Palestinians killed since October 2023 are children and they account for 30 percent of the wounded. This number excludes thousands more missing and presumed dead. On Thursday Luis Moreno Ocampo, the founding chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, told Middle East Eye that Israel is committing genocide in Gaza, a position backed by numerous legal experts, rights groups and governments. Parliamentarians demand sanctions Bar's visit to Britain comes as political pressure piles on the Labour government to cease political, military and economic cooperation with Israel. On Friday morning, 112 British parliamentarians wrote to Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Foreign Secretary David Lammy and Attorney General Richard Hermer. 'How many more Palestinians need to be killed or forced into starvation before our government takes the action so desperately needed?' - Imran Hussain, Labour MP They demanded that the government immediately publishes its response to the International Court of Justice's advisory opinion on 19 July last year that Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian territory. The MPs urged the government to "address the unlawful situation occurring in the OPT [Occupied Palestinian Territories], as well its own obligations under international law". They said the "failure of the government to publish its response" a year on from the advisory opinion, must be "rectified". Chris Doyle, the director of the Council for Arab-British Understanding (Caabu), said: "It is an utter nonsense that a year on from this historic advisory opinion that the government has not issued its formal response. Sources have told Caabu that the legal response was drafted months ago. "It is also not that complex a legal document based on many previous legal opinions," he added. "What it highlights is the government's continued aversion to hold Israel to account, its failure to uphold international law, and respect these international judicial institutions as it claims it does." 'Karim Khan did his job': Founding chief prosecutor on threats against ICC Read More » On Thursday evening, more than 80 MPs and peers from nine political parties signed a letter organised by Labour MPs Richard Burgon and Imran Hussain urging the government to impose comprehensive sanctions on Israel. The letter calls on the government to "suspend the UK-Israel trade agreement until Israel complies with international law" and to "ban all trade in goods and services with illegal Israeli settlements". The MPs urged an end to all arms transfers to Israel, "including F-35 components, that can be used in violations of international humanitarian law". Hussain said: "What is the government waiting for? How many more Palestinians need to be killed or forced into starvation before our government takes the action so desperately needed?" Burgon said: "We need tough action to force Israel to end its atrocities against the Palestinian people. That means ending all arms sales and imposing widespread sanctions on Israel - just as were rightly imposed on Russia over Ukraine."
Middle East Eye
3 days ago
- Middle East Eye
Jeremy Corbyn to host 'inquiry' into UK role in Gaza atrocities
Jeremy Corbyn, the former leader of the UK's Labour Party, is set to host a 'Gaza tribunal' in order to determine the extent of British complicity in Israel's military campaign on the besieged Palestinian territory. Now an independent MP, Corbyn is a critic of the UK's support for Israel in what rights groups and international legal experts have described as a genocide in Gaza. Corbyn had earlier attempted to pass legislation in parliament for an independent public tribunal, similar to those on the Iraq war, on the British role in the conflict. At the beginning of June, he told Middle East Eye that Prime Minister Keir Starmer's government needed to decide whether it would support an inquiry or 'block our efforts to expose the truth'. On 4 July, the Labour government blocked the attempt during a reading of the bill. New MEE newsletter: Jerusalem Dispatch Sign up to get the latest insights and analysis on Israel-Palestine, alongside Turkey Unpacked and other MEE newsletters The UK has supplied Israel with arms during the course of its military operation in Gaza, which is confirmed to have left close to 60,000 people dead and has involved ethnic cleansing of Palestinians from their homes in various parts of the territory. Britain's Royal Air Force has also conducted surveillance flights over Gaza and supplied Israel with intelligence for its operations. In Ilford North, Leanne Mohamad and the British left set their sights on Labour Read More » The International Court of Justice has determined there is a plausible case that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza and the International Criminal Court has issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his former defence minister, Yoav Gallant. According to Corbyn's media office, the unofficial tribunal would be held in September and will involve testimony by survivors of Israeli attacks, international law experts and whistleblowers, among others. Organised in four parts, it will look at the British role in abuses against Palestinians; the scale of violence inflicted in Gaza; Britain's legal obligations to prevent war crimes, and whether it has fulfilled those duties. Announcing the tribunal, Corbyn said: 'Just like Iraq, government ministers are doing everything they can to hide the truth. Just like Iraq, they will not succeed. 'They cannot stop the inevitable: a full and independent inquiry. We will uncover the full scale of British complicity in genocide – and we will bring about justice for the people of Palestine.'
Gulf Today
4 days ago
- Gulf Today
Before a rethink of 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, according to The Independent. 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.
