Geraint Davies (Swansea West) (Lab/Co-op) I beg to move, That this
House has considered a specialist workforce for children with
special educational needs and disabilities. It is a great pleasure
and privilege to serve under your chairpersonship, Mr Sharma. I am
the chair of the all-party parliamentary group on speech and
language difficulties, which is supported by the Royal College of
Speech and Language. I first pay tribute to Lord Ramsbotham, who
did so much for...Request free trial
(Swansea West)
(Lab/Co-op)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered a specialist workforce for
children with special educational needs and disabilities.
It is a great pleasure and privilege to serve under your
chairpersonship, Mr Sharma. I am the chair of the all-party
parliamentary group on speech and language difficulties, which is
supported by the Royal College of Speech and Language. I first
pay tribute to , who did so much for the
group over so many years, after an illustrious career in the Army
and then the Prison Service. He certainly added great value.
Something like 50% of poorer children arrive at school with a
speech delay, and in an average-sized class, which is 30 across
Britain, something like two or three children have a speech delay
of two to four years. Obviously, we are here to talk about the
wider totality of special educational needs, not just speech and
language, but it is worth mentioning that early intervention on
speech and language would massively improve school performance,
and thereby increase future tax revenues and reduce social costs,
prison costs, justice costs and so on, so we really should think
about that. In the wider totality, early intervention is a very
good idea.
This debate, which I commissioned, comes partly on the back of a
letter that I wrote to the Minister on behalf of 16 all-party
groups, calling for the Department for Education and the
Department of Health and Social Care to work in collaboration on
special educational needs. We have now had the special
educational needs review, and I was very pleased that in January
the Minister agreed to speak to me. I am looking forward to
confirming that date for a meeting with her and representatives
from the all-party groups on autism, on cerebral palsy, on
childcare and early education, on children who need palliative
care, on disability, on dyslexia and other specific learning
difficulties, on eye health and visual impairment, on muscular
dystrophy, on oracy, on penal affairs, for the prevention of
childhood trauma, on psychology, on social mobility, for special
educational needs and disabilities, on speech and language
difficulties, and on stroke. A very wide range of MPs is
interested in this issue in one way or another.
On top of that, the SEND in The Specialists coalition, with which
the Minister will be familiar, sent a letter in parallel to ours
with the support of 114 organisations— I will not read them
out—which has now grown to 128. The debate also comes on the back
of a number of written questions I have tabled on specialist
workforce, and another letter from 22 all-party groups about
funding for speech and language therapy.
The Government have announced the plan for special educational
needs and disabilities and alternative provision for England, and
I hope the Minister will set out a bit more detail on that in
this debate. I know there is a steering group planned for 2023,
which aims to complete by 2025. As far as parents and people
engaged with this issue are concerned, the sooner, the
better.
The Minister will be aware that there have also been three
petitions. One is about mandatory training for all teaching staff
engaged with special educational needs, again to ensure
identification and early intervention.
As for parliamentary activity, I am very pleased that the Chamber
Engagement Team got in touch with me about this debate and asked
people to send in their experiences. I was more than pleased that
1,800 responses were received from parents, practitioners, and
other adults who have engaged with the system, wherever they
live, and faced similar challenges across the piece. Those
challenges generally included huge waiting lists for support for
their children. Obviously, the longer the delay, the more it
costs to get people back on track and the greater the struggles
in adulthood and the impact on life chances.
There is a second issue about the threshold for getting support:
how ill is someone, or are they ill enough, as it were? “Ill” is
probably the wrong word here, but is someone’s condition
sufficient to satisfy the criteria for early intervention? A lot
of parents feel neglected, unsupported and not understood. They
probably think there is some sort of differential diagnosis; I do
not know.
There is also an issue about fighting for diagnosis itself to
start with, and often when there is a plan ready to go, the
support is not in place to deliver it. Clearly, many people have
to resort to going private, which sometimes means worse
provision, but obviously at a cost, as they have to pay for
it.
There is a special issue, which the Minister will be aware of,
for girls and young women, who might be misdiagnosed as having
mental health problems. Good plans are put in place, but are not
followed through, or people are deprived of their plan owing to
changes being made, perhaps to resources, so the vital education
to give them the platform they need to succeed in later life is
not provided.
People can also be ping-ponged between different services, which
causes confusion, delay and uncertainty, and sometimes there are
issues over sharing information from specialists with the school.
The information has to go through the parents, rather than the
school, and if a second language is involved, effective delivery
can be impeded.
There is also an issue about coming up with feasible plans, which
are not optimal plans owing to lack of resources, where people
say, “We would like to do this, but we can’t, so we will do that.
It’s not quite what is needed, but it’s all we can afford.”
Obviously, there were also a lot of positive replies, because
there is a galaxy of excellent people out there doing their best
to provide an excellent service to meet these needs. However,
they are finding it difficult to cope. I do not want in any way
to criticise the people in the special educational needs service
who are doing such a fine job and need our support, but there is
postcode lottery, because where someone lives determines how good
a service they receive, according to resources and the
availability of skilled staff. In some places, there are good
networks where people have a good experience of different
specialisms working together optimally to deliver excellent
outputs for those in need; in other places, the experience is not
so good.
I will not go through a list of specific examples, but the people
who wrote to me were clearly saying, “We need funding, early
intervention, a joined-up system, training for teachers and an
evidence-based approach, particularly in relation to behaviours
that appear in girls and young women.” Early intervention is of
primary concern for the economy, but also with respect to
releasing parents who often cannot work because they are looking
after their children owing to the fact that the service is not
there to deliver for the child. That means parents staying at
home who could be at work. We are thinking about growth and how
we manage the economy, so that is another consideration.
Let me turn to the reaction to the special educational needs and
alternative provision plan. Various sectors have criticised the
plan’s lack of urgency and ambition. Nobody is saying that what
is in the plan is not commendable, but a crisis has been building
for many years and we need to get on with addressing it.
Therefore, this is another opportunity for the Government to
listen to our concerns and to build the support to drive forward
with greater speed.
Many people have commented that they have been waiting years for
the Government to act to fix the broken special educational needs
system. They are now saying, “Well is this all it is? We need
more sooner.” That includes the SEND in The Specialists coalition
of 128 organisations that I have mentioned. They are talking
about the number of specialists, rising demand, and the new
demands after covid. Certainly, the Royal College of Speech and
Language and the surveys that we have commissioned have found
that, interestingly, middle-class parents who had children with
speech and language difficulties often saw an improvement in
their child’s performance. That is because the parents would be
at home, working from laptops, and spending quality time with the
children. There is an issue there about having more flexible
working more generally in the economy, as it would help
productivity, and perhaps reduce costs and encourage better
targeting.
In contrast, of course, the poorer children did not fare so well.
Perhaps they had a single parent who was on a zero-hours
contract, who did not have much time to spend with the child, and
who did not have proper internet access that they could
afford—there is an issue there about universal wi-fi clouds that
the Government might want to think about. During covid, poorer
children fared a lot worse in general; and specifically, those
with speech and language difficulties deteriorated quite quickly.
It is certainly worth considering that differential output.
Perhaps I will send this research to the Minister.
This debate is about just one aspect of the plan, which is the
specialist workforce. We welcome the Government’s commitment to
work in a collegiate way alongside children, young people,
families and other providers in the SEND system. The Departments
for Education and of Health and Social Care set out a clear
timetable for SEND workforce planning. We have a steering group
that will move forward by 2023.
Wearing my speech and language hat, let me welcome the Early
Language and Support for Every Child pathfinders, and the early
identification and support for children with speech and language
difficulties. The royal college is pleased that it was involved
with the NHS and the Department for Education in that scoping,
and I hope that it will continue to be involved in the Department
in the future through the alternative provision specialist
taskforce.
Let me lay out the main commitments that I am looking for from
the Minister. First, we want a commitment to have the meeting
with the signatories of the 16 all-party groups that has been
promised and also a commitment by the Government to speak to the
all-party group on speech and language difficulties in a separate
meeting about what is happening, so that they can be quizzed by
those in the industry. Secondly, we want a commitment to give the
SEND in The Specialists coalition a place on the SEND workforce
steering group, as it is important that the industry is engaged
with the civil service and the Departments to get the best, most
practicable plan possible.
Thirdly, we want the Government to commit to come up with a plan
on how they will improve access to the specialist workforce for
children, young people and families right now. We have talked
about the 2023 and 2025 milestones, but, obviously, children grow
up very quickly and they need that support now. Perhaps the
Minister can elaborate on precisely what is happening in the
meantime to bring forward tailored support. We want to see a
broad approach—a holistic approach—to the definition of the SEND
specialist workforce, because there are quite variety of people
involved. Then there is the issue of recruitment and retention,
on which the Minister may wish to touch. There is an issue about
people leaving the service from the NHS and from the profession
generally. We need not only to recruit and train enough people to
build a force, but to stop people leaving by providing them with
acceptable and enjoyable working conditions.
Finally, on behalf of the 1,800 people who have written in, I
wish to question the Minister about funding and the Government
response to our funding letter of 2021, which I mentioned
earlier. The Government then said that the right funding was
fundamental to accessing speech and language therapy. Will the
Minister elaborate on what she thinks will be sufficient funding
for a SEND workforce plan, to ensure that the speech and language
therapy workforce is trained, developed, retained, supervised and
supported to develop the necessary clinical specialisms and
leadership roles? Will she mention something about student
numbers coming into the workforce, and also address some of the
reasons why people are leaving the workforce?
Perhaps the Minister could also say what her expectations are for
accountability and local systems coming together on joint
provision. How do we ensure accountability and make sure the
resources are there to enable all children and young people with
special educational needs and speech, language and communication
needs and/or swallowing needs get timely access to the speech and
language therapy they require? That would include provision for
children and young people who need special educational needs
support, as well as those with education, health and care
plans.
I am glad to see a large number of Members here who want to get
involved in the debate, so I will end my comments there. I look
forward to a response from the Minister.
9.46am
(Hastings and Rye)
(Con)
It is a pleasure to speak under your chairship, Mr Sharma. Many
young children have faced an array of social and developmental
challenges as a result of covid-19, and children with special
educational needs and disabilities have been deeply affected due
to the lack of services accessible for their needs during this
time.
Every week, I have at least one constituent come to see me,
pleading for support for their child with special educational
needs, which are often undiagnosed because they cannot get an
education, health and care plan or an appointment with child and
adolescent mental health services. The formative years of a
child’s life are essential for their development, and without
changes and improved support for these specialist services,
children with SEND will be exposed to bullying, mental health
issues, isolation and disadvantages later in life and in the
workforce.
SEND in The Specialists highlighted how we need to incentivise
employment into the special needs workforce, as well as retain
those already in it. Improving recruitment and retention is vital
to provide the specialist teachers and staff that we need for our
children and young people. Many schools need more assistance for
these children. For schools to remain inclusive, it is essential
to have specialist and supportive frameworks in place to keep
more children in mainstream education.
I enjoy visiting the primary and secondary schools across
Hastings and Rye. It is the best part of this job. I speak to the
pupils and staff. One young primary school teacher was telling me
recently that she has four young children with challenging SEND
needs in her class. Without the support of teaching assistants
and named teaching assistants, it would be impossible to control
the class and provide for the needs of these children, let alone
the rest of the class, especially if the TAs and NTAs are off
sick or leave because they, too, find it extremely
challenging.
Inclusion is not always the best thing for the child with special
needs, nor the rest of the children in the class. Both miss out
on education. We have to face the fact that while mainstream
inclusion is important, some children need a high level of
specialist support, which can only be provided in special needs
schools or in alternative provision.
We need more SEND and alternative provision across Hastings and
Rye, especially AP for secondary-aged children. We have a
significant number of primary and secondary-aged children with
high-level needs. It is very difficult to access EHC plans, and
the waiting list for CAMHS locally is now two years. It is just
not good enough. Early intervention is vital in ensuring that the
right support is given at the right time, so that each child with
SEND can fulfil their potential and become full, active and
productive members of our communities.
I welcome the Government SEND and alternative provision
improvement plan published earlier this month, which will help to
deliver new standards to improve identification of the needs and
expectations of the level of support that would be available in
local areas. The plan creates additional funding of more than £10
billion by 2023-24, which is an increase of more than 50%, to
support and help young people with SEND. It is also encouraging
that the improvement plan will create a new leadership special
educational needs national professional qualification—a SENCO
NPQ—which will ensure that teachers have the training that they
need to provide the right support for children. That is in
addition to expanded training for staff, but we need those
staff.
To address the demand levels, it is necessary to deal with the
backlog, which is a consequence of the pandemic. Ofsted
highlights that speech and language therapy has one of the longer
waiting lists and that there are reductions in the service
provided. The impact of covid-19 has only exacerbated those
problems: demand for speech and language therapists increased
after the pandemic because of the additional 94,000 children with
speech, language and communication needs in 2021-22. Young
children and teens rely on that therapy as an essential way to
develop social and articulative skills; if their needs are not
dealt with effectively, that section of society could be
isolated.
(Greenwich and Woolwich)
(Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for allowing me an intervention. I
intervene purely because the issue that I hear most about from
parents of SEN children is the lengthy waiting time for speech
and language therapists, which is in part due to workforce
shortages. The improvement plan is welcome in the sense that it
talks about improving access, but does she agree that we need
more therapists now, precisely because of the impact that delays
have on children in the system, as my hon. Friend the Member for
Swansea West () pointed out?
I agree with the hon. Gentleman. I was going to say that all
primary schools that I visited in Hastings and Rye have
highlighted the need for speech and language provision for
younger children coming to school following covid. It is
essential. They are behind with oracy and communication skills,
and that impacts on their ability to access learning. Our local
primary schools have provided that provision themselves, and they
work to help and support our local children.
A number of charities are already working to provide help and
support for certain children with special needs. For example,
Auditory Verbal UK is making great progress in helping to
implement specialist early interventions to support deaf babies
and children in learning to talk and listen. Roughly 80% of
children who attend at least two years of the charity’s
pre-school programme achieve the same level of spoken language as
their hearing peers. Through Government investment, the charity
would be able to aid considerably more deaf children to reach the
same level. It is a great charity that supports not only deaf
children but the whole support system. A number of charities,
third-sector groups and volunteers work with children who have
important issues that need to be addressed.
(Worcester) (Con)
Does my hon. Friend agree that investment to support
organisations such as Auditory Verbal UK and the therapies that
it can provide is excellent value for money? If children are
reached with the right support early on, they can engage in
mainstream education and benefit from it much more than if they
are left with those needs on entry into primary school.
I completely agree. We could not function as a country without
our voluntary sector—it is one of the wheels that keeps the
country going—but we need to invest in it, so that it can save
lots of money in the long term. That is absolutely right.
A specialist SEND workforce will make positive changes to our
country. We must ensure that we allow a space for those children
with special educational needs and disabilities to reach their
full potential in society.
(in the Chair)
I intend to call the Front-Bench spokespeople at about 10.40 am,
and we have about nine speakers. I will not set a time limit now;
I leave it to hon. Members to discipline themselves.
9.54am
(Hayes and Harlington)
(Lab)
I declare an interest, Mr Sharma—my wife is Dr Cynthia Pinto,
chair of the committee on the Division of Educational and Child
Psychology, and she is active in the Association of Educational
Psychologists, so you can imagine what our breakfast
conversations are like. I welcome the Minister, who has had
responsibility for disabilities in the past, which gives her an
understanding of some of the issues we face. She has also been a
Parliamentary Private Secretary in the Treasury, so she knows
where the money is buried, which is extremely helpful. I thank
Professor Vivian Hill from the Institute of Education at
University College London, who has provided a number of us with
briefings on educational psychology.
I want to draw attention to the issues facing educational
psychologists. The chief inspector of education identified that
the demand and need for educational psychology services from
schools and families, to support early intervention and
preventive work, has significantly increased. The inspector’s
report also identified that there is a huge geographical
variation—to which my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West
() referred—in access to EPs,
and noted that 60% of local authority EHCP assessments are not
being completed within the 20-week timeframe as required.
Alternative provision has been mentioned. The Ofsted report last
November identified that more children are being referred to
alternative provision, but often because of the lack of access to
specialist services in mainstream schools. Let us look at the
stats on the increased numbers of education, health and care
plans being issued. During 2021, 93,000 initial requests were
made for assessment for EHCP—up from 76,000 in 2020. It is the
highest number since data was first collected in 2016. His
Majesty’s chief inspector of education reported that 1.5 million
pupils were identified with SEND in 2022—an increase of 71% on
the previous year; I found that staggering. The number of EHCPs
has also grown by 51% since 2014-15. I think we are all
experiencing that in our constituencies, as we receive
representations from parents struggling to gain access to the
planning processes.
Also interesting—I wonder whether others have experienced this—is
the significant increase in the number of SEND tribunals, which
becomes incredibly expensive for the local authorities. This is
worrying. It is interesting that Professor Hill has identified
this from the various statistics that have been brought out, and
it was raised in a debate in the main Chamber a couple of months
ago about the unmet mental health needs of children and young
people. A record number of children and young people are being
referred to NHS services for mental health difficulties. In the
previous debate on this issue, MP after MP reported the issues
and demand on CAMHS that are overwhelming it; that is
increasingly worrying.
An increased number of children and young people are being
permanently suspended or excluded from school. Some Members might
have listened to the reports this morning about the number of
“ghost” children, who are no longer in school. The figure of 20%
was absolutely staggering. Covid has obviously had an impact, and
there is a continuing impact on mental health, but local
authorities struggle to maintain levels of support services for
families in particular.
I also found interesting the evidence that local authorities
struggle to recruit educational psychologists. The recent local
government ombudsman report shows that 70% of local authorities
are now struggling to recruit EPs. The Government have recognised
that; it is one issue that is being addressed in the future of
our workforce plan for skilled workers and the recruitment of
staff. It has also been recognised that the recruitment of staff
from overseas can assist us during this period while we struggle
to recruit.
Many local authorities are now relying on locum cover from
private providers but, as hon. Members will appreciate, that can
be extremely expensive compared with direct investment.
Educational psychologists have raised with the Government the
issue of adequate funding of the services overall, which my hon.
Friend the Member for Swansea West mentioned. Specifically for
EPs, the Government responded in December with £21 million in
additional funding, which was welcome. That will be for intakes
from 2024, but the problem is that the core funding is
inadequate—it has not been increased since 2020.
Let us look at the figures put out by the British Psychological
Society, of which the Division of Educational and Child
Psychology is a part. The announcement of £21 million for 400
additional educational psychologists is definitely a step in the
right direction, but the BPS says that it really does not go far
enough to close the workforce gap. The figure that I find
shocking is that we are now at the stage where in 2017 there were
about 3,000 educational psychologists working in England; on
average, that is the equivalent of one educational psychologist
for every 3,500 children and young people between the ages of
five and 19. Again, there was one for every 5,000 for those
between the ages of nought and 25 —the plan period. Therefore,
the demand is for a greater increase of investment in educational
psychologists to increase the numbers because of the increasing
demands.
I will raise one issue that is specific to my own patch, but
which may be reflected in other constituencies. I have 2,400
refugees—asylum seekers—in hotels in my constituency, including
many children, who go into local schools. I have toured the
hotels and done advice surgeries in them, and what has been
reported back from the schools and from the discussions I am
having with families is that a number of those children, who are
largely from war zones, are suffering from post-traumatic stress
disorder. That is placing an increased burden on individual
schools. The teachers welcome rising to that challenge, but they
need additional resources.
I would welcome a discussion with the Government—maybe all MPs
have this situation in their constituencies—about what additional
resources could be targeted at particular areas so that they can
overcome this period, which I am sure will be temporary, but
requires resources at the moment. The message is clear from the
DECP and others: additional resources need to be specifically
targeted at the recruitment and training of educational
psychologists to meet this growing demand and, exactly as the
hon. Member for Hastings and Rye () said, to give children the
life chances that they desperately need.
(in the Chair)
Looking at the time and the Front Bench, I would appreciate it if
Members would stick to four minutes.
10.03am
(North West Norfolk) (Con)
I will keep to your timeframe, Mr Sharma. I welcome the
opportunity to speak in this important debate, and I congratulate
the hon. Member for Swansea West () on introducing it and on
his work chairing the APPG.
One of my first visits as the MP for North West Norfolk was to
Greenpark Academy in King’s Lynn. The first issue that the
headteacher raised with me was access to special needs provision
and speech and language therapy for pupils who, at that school,
often come from disadvantaged backgrounds. On a more recent visit
to Whitefriars School, which has just been given a good Ofsted
rating—it would have been outstanding if it had been a graded
inspection—the school’s special needs unit was making a real
difference in helping children to improve communication skills,
often from a very low base, as a number arrived at the school
non-verbal.
From visiting those and many other schools across my
constituency, particularly in rural parts of North West Norfolk,
the need to provide improved support is clear. The ability to
communicate is fundamental for children to make friends, learn
and realise their potential. The evidence is also strong that
without the right support to help people with speech and language
needs, children are at increased risk of poor educational
attainment, mental health issues and poor employment
outcomes.
Today’s debate is taking place because the current access to
speech and language therapy needs to improve dramatically.
Figures from the Royal College of Speech and Language Therapists
that were shared ahead of the debate show that over 67,000
children were on a waiting list for speech and language therapy,
with more than a third waiting over 18 weeks. As we have heard,
many more are waiting over a year or, indeed, two years. That
situation is not acceptable; covid has made it worse and we need
to address it. Given those real challenges, I welcome the SEND
and AP improvement plan that was published earlier this month,
with its focus on speech and communication issues. There is a
welcome new commitment for a joint DFE and DHSC approach to SEND
workforce planning, although I hope the timetable set out in that
paper can be accelerated.
That join-up, which is the holy grail in Government, across
health, education and social care at national level is vital. As
the royal college points out, that has to be accompanied by
sufficient funding to train, retain and develop the workforce.
DFE—again in partnership with NHS England, which I welcome—is
pioneering pathfinders for early language and support as part of
the £70 million change programme. I previously raised with the
Minister the potential for Norfolk and Waveney to be one of the
nine pilot areas. I look forward to meeting my integrated care
board shortly to discuss what we might be able to bring there. I
would welcome further opportunity to discuss that with the
Minister, and more information about the process for selecting
those areas.
(West Suffolk) (Ind)
I agree with everything my hon. Friend has said, and would add
Suffolk to the list of places that would like to be a pathfinder
area. Does he agree that early intervention is vital, even though
there are now more EHCPs than there were? The earlier that
support for children starts, the more likely a positive outcome;
getting that support is vital.
Indeed, I do. My right hon. Friend has done a lot of work in this
area, not least with his private Member’s Bill.
The plan has a welcome focus on expanded training, including:
5,000 early years staff gaining accredited qualifications; an
increase in the capacity of specialists, with two more training
cohorts of educational psychologists; and the new leadership
level SENDCO qualification. I am glad to see that it also commits
to publishing the first of three best practice guides, including
for Nuffield early language intervention, which has made a real
difference in a number of my schools in Norfolk.
Finally, I welcome the new deal that provides £70 million in
additional funding from the Department, in conjunction with
Norfolk County Council, which will help to increase funding for
special educational needs places. It will develop more specialist
resource bases and AP in mainstream schools, which I hope will
include schools in North West Norfolk, as well as building two
more special schools.
In conclusion, getting this right is vital because children have
only one opportunity when it comes to their education. We need to
do all we can to help them realise their potential. The focus now
must be on implementing those plans.
10.07am
(Tiverton and Honiton)
(LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Sharma. SEND
services in Devon have been in serious crisis for a long time,
probably three or four years, with the situation deteriorating
lately. Last year, Devon County Council apologised for failing to
improve SEND services, and promised that things would improve and
that it would redouble its efforts. We are continuing to see a
problem around a lack of political leadership and of oversight at
the council. My postbag is heavy with correspondence from
constituents who are at their wits’ end trying to get the support
and educational placements that children need.
The wait times for assessments are far beyond the statutory 20
weeks. The lack of educational psychologists is leaving families
uncertain, having to juggle work commitments and looking after
their child at the same time. It is definitely leading to people
being outside of the workforce who would otherwise be fulfilling
an important role in it. The looming threat in Devon of these
services being placed in special measures, or removed from the
council’s remit, shows that things must change. The promise of
more money in the forthcoming council budget is welcome. The
Government’s recent announcement of a new SEND school at
Cranbrook is again welcome, but we need to ensure that taxpayers’
money is being spent effectively to deliver the SEND placements
that our children deserve.
I have had constituents contact me to highlight situations where
a child is allocated a placement that is wholly unsuitable for
them, and the child cannot take it up but remains on the school
roll, with the funding also remaining assigned to that school. We
need to ensure that money follows the child and that appropriate
frontline services are delivered regardless of where the child
then moves. I have seen for myself in East Devon that SEND pupils
are being taught in cupboards and storage rooms, and I know that
that is not unique to my part of Devon, because I have also seen
it reported on the BBC. We should not allow that to continue. I
cannot help but admire the parents who are pushing Devon County
Council and the Government on this. Devon SEND Parents and Carers
for Change staged a protest at county hall in Exeter last month,
and they are trying to shine a spotlight on some of these
failings.
It is not all gloom; there are some examples of best practice. My
constituent, Danielle Punter, has written books and a
blog—autability.co.uk—with tips on education and support in
understanding neurodivergence. Danielle pointed out last month
that when partial school closures happen as a result of lockdown
or strikes, it is often special needs school pupils who are most
affected, because those schools need to be fully staffed in order
for children with a high level of SEND requirements to get the
best possible care, otherwise they need to stay at home. In
short, we need to get to grips with some of these repeated
failures, particularly in Devon, and that will require political
leadership and political oversight.
(in the Chair)
I am now formally introducing a four-minute time limit.
10.11am
(Darlington) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Sharma, and
I congratulate the hon. Member for Swansea West () on securing this important
debate. This issue is of concern to many of my constituents in
Darlington. Indeed, 77 people from my constituency signed the
e-petitions relating to the debate. I welcome the announcement
last week of a new school in Darlington and thank Councillors
Jonathan Dulston and Jon Clarke for their work on that. This
additional provision of 48 places for SEN children in Darlington
is much needed.
However, Darlington faces serious problems with CAMHS. The delays
in getting people assessed are significant. It impacts my case
load and delays access to services for young people in my
constituency. It is hugely important for Darlington parents and
children that we speed up the woefully inadequate waiting times
for CAMHS assessments by Tees, Esk and Wear Valleys NHS
Foundation Trust. As Ministers are aware, we cannot overestimate
the challenging circumstances that TEWV service users and their
families face. More than 300 under-18s in Darlington are awaiting
an autism assessment, and more than 20% of them have been waiting
almost three years. That is just not good enough. In the absence
of a diagnosis, these families’ lives are on hold, and these
children’s lives are not progressing as they should.
I continue to engage regularly with TEWV and the families of
special educational needs children in Darlington, including
through my autism forum on Facebook, to ensure that their voices
are heard and to push for us to take more action to reduce these
backlogs, which are so damaging. I do, however, welcome the
recent announcement that Darlington has secured additional
funding of £6.19 million for special educational needs provision
in the town, to address the growing needs in our community and
tackle the high cost of out-of-town provision. I also warmly
welcome the recent SEND and alternative provision improvement
plan, which commits to increase spending on children and young
people with such needs by more than 50% to over £10 billion by
2023-24.
I have tabled several written questions to the Department for
Education in the past about its records for SEN training among
teaching staff, and I was disappointed to learn that it does not
keep records of the extent of such training. However, the recent
news of expanded training for staff in early years provision,
with special educational needs co-ordinators and educational
psychologists, will, I hope, go some way to addressing that
gap.
This is a personal issue for me. Like many people across the
country, I have family members with special educational needs,
and I have seen directly the work that parents must put in to
secure the necessary support. It cannot be right that the most
vocal parents or those who know the system are the ones who
secure the right provision for their child. I have seen parents
in my constituency surgery who have been pinging from local
authority to CAMHS to schools to healthcare providers, which
makes them frustrated, angry and bewildered. We really need to do
so much better.
In conclusion, the SEND and additional provision improvement
plans are good steps on the way, but we must ensure that the
actions that are set out in them are delivered, and we must make
the systems absolutely centred on the child—not just paying lip
service to that idea, but really breaking down the silos in
health, education and Government to truly deliver, end the
excessive waits, and give the kids a chance.
10.15am
(Strangford) (DUP)
It is a real pleasure to speak in this debate. I thank the hon.
Member for Swansea West () for securing this debate
and leading it, and for setting the scene so well, as he often
does. It is nice to see him down here with us in the Chamber,
instead of up there in the Chair; that has been a pleasure
today.
There have been ongoing issues relating to provision for special
educational needs. Children with SEN rely heavily on routine,
consistency and specialised support. Many people in my
constituency contact me in relation to these issues; most
notably, I am contacted about staffing issues. So I will focus on
staffing issues today, including serving staff not receiving the
adequate support and training to assist pupils with SEN.
I believe that we must do all we can to ensure that children are
given an equal and fair start in life, so it is great to be here
today to discuss that. I welcome the Minister to her place. She
does not have to answer any of my questions about this issue,
because we have a Minister in Northern Ireland with
responsibility for this issue. However, I wanted to come here
today to support the hon. Member for Swansea West and others who
have spoken, because the things that have been spoken about here
today are the very same for us in Northern Ireland. There is no
difference; each other’s problems are replicated.
I will speak briefly on Northern Ireland, because I always like
to give a taste of the situation there. In Northern Ireland,
67,000 children have some form of SEN, which is a fifth of the
school population, and 19,000 children have received a statement
about their need for additional support, which is a 20.3%
increase on what it once was.
This issue is about the staff we have, including those who have
received the basic SEN training for already qualified teachers to
act in the event of sickness. Unfortunately, staffing numbers are
down in Northern Ireland. I say this with all the provisos that I
have as a Unionist, but we need a functioning Assembly that can
take such things on. We must ensure that our Governments are
allocating sufficient funding to train SEN-specialised teachers,
so that the pressure is taken off teaching staff who are not
specialised in SEN teaching and communication with children who
have SEN.
The Education Authority in Northern Ireland also disclosed that
the number of educational psychologists has decreased by 24% in
less than five years—what a massive drop for us back home—from
140 to 106. The Northern Ireland Commissioner for Children and
Young People also made 40 recommendations for improvement. The
petition was signed by 29,000 people who called for SEN training
to be made mandatory for all teaching staff, which is also
recommended by the commissioner.
Some of the things that we are asking for are the things that
others are asking for, and I know that the Minister will respond.
And whatever the Minister responds to about the situation here
will probably also give us an indication of where we need to be
in Northern Ireland. Although the petition was centred around the
English education system, it is crucial that any decision taken
in relation to SEN training for teachers follows through to the
devolved nations. My request to the Minister specifically is to
ensure that the recommendations and answers that she gives in
this debate are conveyed directly to the Education Authority and
the Northern Ireland Assembly, because what we can learn from
this debate can be a lesson for us all.
We are also living in a world where assessments for SEN are
unfortunately taking considerable time, as we must ensure that
children are assessed accurately, so that they can receive the
right amount of support and specialist care. I ask for that to be
done as well.
Once this debate has been completed, where do we go next? We must
take the relevant steps to ensure that a sufficient workforce is
there. We must encourage our young people to take degrees in this
area and make such degrees accessible to them. It is about making
sure that teachers are trained, in place and can do the job. This
is the effort that we go to and that they go to. Such teachers
deserve to be under the least amount of pressure possible. So I
call upon the Minister to engage with all regional Governments
within the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
in order to come to a joint decision on how the issue of a
specialised workforce can be tackled.
10.19am
(Wantage) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Sharma.
Whenever we receive petition data, I do what I am sure we all do:
I look at where my constituency ranks for number of signatures.
For the first time in my three years as an MP—unless I have
missed one—my Wantage and Didcot constituency was No. 1 for this
petition. I think that reflects the problems going on at
Oxfordshire County Council at the moment, as I receive almost
daily complaints from parents and schools about emails not being
answered, the phone not being picked up and EHCPs returned with
the wrong child described on the plan.
While the county council would suggest that that is all about
funding, some of those issues are not about that. Putting the
wrong child on an EHCP when it is returned to a parent is not
about funding. Actually, if the amount of money that is spent on
tribunals by the county council was spent on the service, we
would have a better service overall. As it happens, there is more
money going into the system—an extra £2.6 billion—which will mean
50% higher spending in 2023-24 than in 2019-20. However, the
issues are not just about funding.
In any organisation, there is always a debate about specialist
versus generalist: whether we should have one person who is
responsible for everything, the advantage of which is expert
knowledge, or whether everybody should be responsible, so that
they do not shirk that responsibility. That is true in this area
too. It is right that the Government are reviewing the mandatory
requirement for the national award for SENCOs, because parents
clearly do not feel it is working in quite the way it should. I
also warmly welcome the forthcoming apprenticeship pathway for
those with sensory impairments.
However, it is also right to look at initial teacher training. Of
course, there is initial teacher training and an expectation that
all teachers should have some understanding and be able to handle
children with special educational needs. But, again, it is
absolutely clear that many parents do not feel that that is the
case. While there are children who need specialist schools and
other specialist provision, we know that children staying in
mainstream education leads to better outcomes: they have better
social skills; they have more independence; they have fewer
behavioural problems. Having children with special educational
needs in the classroom also improves other children’s tolerance
and understanding.
The Government are absolutely right to pursue both those tracks.
We are fortunate to have in the Minister a great advocate for
children with SEND and their parents. She is working with the
Department of Health to try to grip these specialist workforce
issues, but also to help all teachers to feel more confident
about dealing with children who have special educational needs,
so that the first resort is not to try to push them somewhere
else. I look forward to working with the Minister to achieve the
Government’s aim of getting the right support in the right place
at the right time.
10.23am
(York Central)
(Lab/Co-op)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Sharma. I
congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West () on leading today’s debate
and concur with all comments made by colleagues across the
room.
It is a fight, and it is always a fight, to get the right support
in the right place at the right time—that is what parents have
consistently told me. That is why we are here today. We have
serious concerns about the timing of the Government’s proposals.
Already, we are hearing about a specialist workforce group being
set up, but it will be two years before we see that workforce
plan delivered. On top of that, we have the training time to get
those specialists in place to provide the support for young
people, and timing is of the essence.
Time is of the essence for parents in my constituency, too. I
think about the parents who came to see me because their child
goes to specialist provision in the morning, but in the
afternoon, is left to play with Lego; or the child who was
confronted in their school environment because they did not make
eye contact, and was told off and given detention for not doing
so; or the parents whose child, who has autism and is non-verbal,
despite meeting all the thresholds for an EHCP assessment, has
been denied that assessment by their local authority. Children
miss out time and again.
Let me speak about one child whose needs were not recognised in
primary school. We raised our concerns frequently, but the
teachers did not identify his dyslexia and memory and processing
issues until the last term of year 6. He did not get the right
support and fell further and further behind. His experience of
school was horrendous: he had self-esteem issues by year 2 and
signs of anxiety in year 3, and he told us that he would rather
die than go to school in year 4. In years 5 and 6, the impact of
his school experience was huge. Thankfully, he has now had the
opportunity that he should have had when he started school, or
even pre-school. It is always a fight for parents.
I am also here to fight for the workforce. It needs to be
recognised, organised and supported. We are creating family hubs,
but we had Sure Start. We brought people together across the
professions to work together and wrap the services around the
child. We need to reinstitute that. Labour did it, and we will do
it again, because we know the importance of that
inter-working.
I particularly want to speak up for teaching assistants, who are
at the forefront of providing day-by-day support to young people.
They know their children and are attuned to their needs. However,
in a school in York, their contracts have been reduced to just
term-time working, rather than full-time. They are therefore not
able to afford to go to work any more. Teaching assistants should
be recognised as the professionals that they are for the skills
that they bring, and they should be rewarded with the pay they
deserve. They work incredibly hard, giving children confidence on
a day-to-day basis. Many children with special educational needs
identify with their teaching assistant more than anyone else, and
yet they are on minimum wage, term-time contracts. It is frankly
disgraceful. When the Minister puts a workforce plan together, I
ask her to put teaching assistants at the forefront and to
recognise the professional skills they bring in supporting
children at their time of need.
(in the Chair)
I call . As he is the Chair of the
Education Committee, I will relax the four-minute time limit.
10.27am
(Worcester) (Con)
I am honoured, Mr Sharma. That is most kind and unexpected.
I thank the hon. Member for York Central () for what she just said
about teaching assistants. The right hon. Member for Hayes and
Harlington () declared an interest in
relation to his wife’s role. My sister is a teaching assistant in
a special educational needs setting, and I think the work they do
is absolutely heroic. She has faced all sorts of challenges in
her work, including assault by pupils. Teaching assistants turn
up day in, day out to do that work, not because it is well
paid—it is not—but because they are absolutely passionate about
supporting the children. As we heard from so many hon. Members,
this is all about children’s life chances.
I warmly congratulate the hon. Member for Swansea West (). We have had many lively
exchanges over many issues over the years, but on this issue we
are absolutely as one. He presented his case extremely well.
I am Chairman of the Education Committee, and this issue touches
on so many of our inquiries, so I am very grateful to you, Mr
Sharma, for slightly relaxing the time limit so that I can speak
about all of them. As my hon. Friend the Minister knows extremely
well, we are in the midst of conducting an inquiry into early
years and childcare. Yesterday, we heard from SEND specialists in
that space of the enormous benefit of providing the right
specialist workforce at the right time—that early intervention in
the early years, which Members from both sides of the House have
talked about.
It is important that we remember that this can start in the early
years. There is huge benefit in getting speech and language
therapy in front of the right children in the early years. I was
grateful that the hon. Member for Swansea West started his speech
by talking about the importance of that. In my constituency, when
I started as an MP, there was a real problem with the
availability of speech and language therapy. I am told now by the
royal college and by experts that we are one of the best areas in
the country for that provision, and that is extremely welcome,
but there is still more need.
We heard from Speech and Language UK yesterday that, with the
right support and training, teaching assistants can deliver
interventions that can help to reduce the demand on specialist
speech and language therapists and allow them to focus on the
children with genuine complex special needs. It is really
important that we get our support right in that respect.
In my constituency I have a wonderful primary special school
called Fort Royal, which serves the community extremely well.
Tragically, and I think wrongly, that school has lost its
specialist assessment centre—its nursery. That is not for any
planning reason, but simply because the primary school is so
overwhelmed by demand and has a constrained site, that they have
had to create space for statutory provision of primary places at
the expense of early years and nursery provision. That is not a
good situation. I am hearing from nurseries and early years
settings across my constituency that they are facing pupils whose
needs they cannot easily meet as a result of that.
I am glad that Worcestershire Children First has listened to the
concerns that I and others have raised about provision, and has
agreed to commission a new specialist assessment centre. In the
meantime, there is real pressure in that space, and there are
children who are missing out on some of the support that they
should be getting. I want to make sure that the local improvement
and inclusion plans, which the improvement plan rightly talks
about, include the right provision for early years and
nurseries.
The improvement plan, which the Minister has been instrumental in
delivering, has some very welcome initiatives. Those include the
local inclusion plan, national standards, new specialist places—I
warmly welcome the decision to approve an all-through autism
school in south Worcestershire, which will benefit my
constituents—and better support in mainstream education. We have
heard some interesting exchanges about the importance of
mainstream versus specialist education. The reality is that we
need both—and we need more of both. We need support for pupils
with special educational needs throughout the mainstream system,
and we need more specialist places.
I join the right hon. Member for Hayes and Harlington in
recognising the Minister’s expertise in this space. She is the
first Minister I have heard at the Dispatch Box recognising the
rising tide of need that we see in the system. That recognition
is important as we address the need for specialists.
The improvement plan also talks about the transition to
adulthood. Another inquiry that the Education Committee is in the
process of concluding is on careers education, information,
advice and guidance. In the course of that inquiry we have heard
that SEND pupils, and pupils in alternative provision, are not
always getting the high-quality careers advice and guidance they
need to improve their life chances and get good outcomes. I have
seen some excellent examples of this being done well. I recently
visited the special Westminster School in Rowley Regis, and saw
the work that they are doing there with the Black Country careers
hub to support and mentor SEND pupils into careers with employers
such as DPD There was some
interesting partnership work going on.
I have a fantastic primary pupil referral unit in my
constituency, Perryfields Primary PRU, which I recommend the
Minister visits. It was one of the best visits I did as a
Minister—it just happens to be in my constituency. The school
does a fantastic job of meeting the needs of primary pupils.
Regency High School, also in my constituency, does some really
good work with children with complex needs, trying to prepare
them and support them into work. The Government rightly want to
ensure that people with disabilities have the opportunity to
work. In order to do that, we need to get the right support and
careers advice and guidance to people early.
As we have already heard, life chances for young people with SEND
can be hugely improved with the right support. Getting speech and
language therapists and teachers of the deaf in early, as well as
auditory verbal therapy, is really important. Getting the right
teacher training for dealing with children with autism and other
conditions for teachers and teaching assistants is vital.
As the hon. Member for Swansea West and the hon. Member for
Tiverton and Honiton () mentioned, there has been a
huge impact from the pandemic on children with special
educational needs. It is right that we invest in the sector to
ensure that that is made up. When I was at the Department, we
spent a lot of time, money and effort focused on catching up. If
we can spend money on early intervention and supporting children
earlier on, it will do more than catching up belatedly. We should
continue to look at how we make the case for that.
We have heard about the delays to diagnosis; I spoke in a recent
debate on that. I will meet Worcestershire Children First shortly
to talk about some of our problems with the umbrella pathway in
Worcester. One issue that we came across was that the health
system was subjected to a cyber-attack, which has further delayed
some of the desperately needed diagnoses for children. Any
support that the Department can provide to protect systems’
cyber-security and ensure that those issues do not arise would be
extremely welcome.
I have four quick asks of the Minister before I sit down. The
first is the meeting that the SEND in The Specialists campaign
requested. It sounds as though that is likely to be granted, but
I would certainly welcome it. Secondly, I would like a commitment
to keep on investing in continuing professional development for
mainstream teachers and to see what more can be done through the
initial teacher training and early career framework processes to
make sure that we recognise that every teacher is a teacher of
SEND children. Thirdly, I would like a commitment to working with
the Department of Health and Social Care to improve access to the
specialist workforce and to make sure that the NHS workforce plan
takes into account the rising demand in this space, which the
Minister has recognised. Finally, I would like a commitment to
looking carefully at early years and ensuring that local
inclusion plans include the right specialist support, which can
make such a huge difference to children’s life chances.
10.36am
(Dulwich and West Norwood)
(Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Sharma. I
am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Swansea West () for securing this important
debate on the specialist workforce for children with special
educational needs and disabilities. I pay tribute to all the
all-party parliamentary groups that work in that area for their
important contribution in gathering evidence and raising
concerns. I am grateful to every hon. Member who has spoken
today.
We have heard a remarkable consensus this morning on the dire
situation that faces many families with a child with SEND, on the
rapid growth in need, and on the urgency of the need for more
support. My right hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington
() highlighted the link
between unmet need and mental health referrals, school exclusions
and school non-attendance. He rightly highlighted concerns about
the significant unmet need and the trauma experienced by children
and their families who live in initial accommodation for asylum
seekers across the country.
The hon. Member for Hastings and Rye () pointed to the impact of
the pandemic in worsening speech and language delay. I recognise
that issue from my constituency, but it is being raised by
primary schools across the country. She also highlighted the
important innovative technique of auditory verbal, which, as
other hon. Members said, can be delivered at low cost and used by
parents and non-specialists, as well as specialist support staff
in schools.
The hon. Member for Worcester (Mr Walker), the Chair of the
Education Committee, spoke about the importance of intervention
in the early years. My hon. Friend the Member for York Central
() emphasised the
significant impact of long delay on families’ ability to access
support, and the vital work of teaching assistants, who often go
unrecognised and under-rewarded. We also heard from many other
colleagues, and there is wide consensus on the subject.
There are 1.5 million children with SEND in the UK. The number of
children on an education, health and care plan is up by 50% since
2016. Those with SEND are overrepresented among pupils eligible
for free school meals, black pupils and looked-after children.
The support for many children with SEND is insufficient. Parents
often have to battle for a diagnosis, then they battle again for
support, often multiple times at each stage of their child’s
education.
I pay tribute to everyone who works with children with SEND:
speech and language therapists, SENDCOs, specialist teaching
assistants, educational psychologists, specialist teachers of the
deaf and of visually impaired people, and many others. It takes
dedication and commitment to train as a specialist, who often act
as the gateway to the whole of a child’s education. The work of
SEND specialists is vital, but it often goes unseen and
unrecognised.
Research from the Disabled Children’s Partnership is damning. In
response to a recent survey, seven out of 10 parents said that
their disabled child’s health had deteriorated because of lack of
support. Only one in three disabled children have the correct
level of support from their education setting. Only one in seven
families have the correct level of support from social care, only
one in five have the correct level of support from health
services, and only one in five felt that they received the
support needed for their child to fulfil their potential.
That overall context disguises a huge diversity of need. SEND
needs include autism, ADHD, speech and language delay, vision
impairment, hearing loss, foetal alcohol syndrome, cerebral palsy
and Down’s syndrome. That means that detailed workforce planning
is required. There must be staff working in mainstream education
and health settings who can identify and diagnose additional
needs as soon as they are evident, available support in every
school for children with needs that occur commonly, and
specialist support available to draw down for low-prevalence
conditions when they occur.
Securing a specialist workforce matters. For mainstream settings
to be truly inclusive, teachers must have knowledge of and access
to a broad range of specialist skills. Recently, I visited a
secondary school and met the brilliant team who support children
with special educational needs. Their care and commitment to
every single child was inspiring, but they spoke about how hard
it is to obtain a diagnosis for children whose needs had not been
fully identified earlier in their education because of a shortage
of educational psychologists.
Specialist support is vital to keep children in school. Children
with additional needs are over-represented in the data on school
exclusions and in alternative provision. Ensuring the right
support is available can help to avoid exclusions, but for 13
years the Government have failed to plan for the SEND workforce.
The number of specialist teachers of the deaf has declined by 19%
since 2011, and there are more than 67,000 children on the
waiting list for speech and language therapy. There are simply
not enough therapists to meet the need. There is a national
shortage of educational psychologists, with 70% of local
authorities having to rely on agency staff.
Behind those sobering figures are children—children whose needs
are not being met, who are unable to access education, whose
mental health is declining because they are not properly
understood at school, and who are simply disengaging from
education. Alongside each child are parents and families—parents
who spend hours each week fighting for support, who are being
called at work to pick up their child from school, who are
suffering the distress of knowing their child is unhappy and not
fulfilling their potential, and who, like the parents I met in my
constituency recently, feel that they need to give up work so as
to educate their children at home.
The shortage of professionals and the lack of support result in
unacceptably poor outcomes for children with SEND. The Government
recently published their response to the SEND and alternative
provision Green Paper. The Opposition welcome the fact that the
Minister has listened to Labour’s call for a focus on the early
years. Identifying children’s needs early is vital, and the
evidence is clear, but the Government have not said how they will
build SEND diagnosis and support into an early-years sector that
is fragmented and diverse, and within which nurseries in
particular take widely varying approaches to inclusivity.
Families who have a child with SEND find it hardest of all to
find suitable childcare, but allocating more money to a broken
childcare system without reform, as the Government have announced
this week, will not deliver a step change in the availability of
SEND support, particularly as 5,000 childcare providers have
closed since 2021.
The SEND and alternative provision improvement plan has the aim
of reducing the number of EHCPs through improving support in
mainstream schools, but the Government have not set out a clear
plan to achieve it. There is no overall workforce plan.
Meanwhile, the Government are expanding the number of special
schools, which are needed, but there is weak data on which types
of school are needed, and where, and no detailed plan to improve
the inclusivity of mainstream schools.
A fundamental weakness of the Government’s approach is that it is
characterised by pilots, rather than a national roll-out, and
progress is set to be far too slow. Much of the plan will not
come into effect until 2025 or 2026, leaving families to continue
to struggle in the meantime, and more children going through the
whole of their education journey without the support they
need.
Children with SEND and their families need a workforce plan to
deliver the support they need, wherever they live in the country.
A Labour Government would work with professionals and families to
deliver a SEND system that works for every child.
10.44am
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education ()
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Sharma.
First, I congratulate the hon. Member for Swansea West () on securing a debate on
this incredibly important subject. It is wonderful to see so many
people in agreement about what is needed, and to have seen the
expertise on show today. I hope people can see from our SEND and
alternative provision improvement plan the seriousness of the
Government in trying to respond to the needs of children with
special educational needs and disabilities across the
country.
The hon. Member rightly talked about the importance of early
language, which we know feeds into children’s overall learning
and literacy. He talked about the importance of education and
health working together, and I am pleased to say that we jointly
published that report, and that the Department of Health is very
much working hand in glove with us on the plans. He also spoke
about the importance of all-teacher training, which is crucial,
early identification and getting a diagnosis, and recruitment and
retention. I confirm that I would be delighted to meet with him,
and we will talk about dates. I shall touch on some of those
subjects in my speech.
I have had the privilege to meet some of the galaxy of
professionals, as the hon. Gentleman said, who support children
and young people with SEND. Whether they are in early years,
schools, colleges, health and care settings, or specialist and
alternative provision, those are some of the best visits that I
do; it is a joy to meet a group of people who are so dedicated,
skilled and passionate about meeting the needs of their children
and young people. Hon. Members mentioned investment in the
specialist workforce a number of times, and I am keen to engage
with all the charities and organisations that have expertise in
this issue as we take our plans forward to the next stage.
The SEND and alternative provision improvement plan is meant to
support the entitlement set out in 2014 through a much clearer
local and national focus on the strategy for how we can plan to
meet those needs, whether that is through best practice guides
for teachers or local inclusion plans, which mean that each area
will have to assess and work out how to meet those needs. The
funding has increased by more than 50% over the last few years.
The idea is that all those parts of the system will be looked at
and will hopefully work better together to meet rising need,
improve access and build confidence in the system. A number of
Members talked about the fact that there is not enough
alternative provision, that there is not enough early years
support or that there is something specific in their area such
that needs are not being met. I hope that the whole system change
that we have set out will go a long way to addressing those
issues.
Through our consultation process, we heard too many stories from
families who are frustrated by the system and battling to access
specialist support. We also heard that reform is not possible
without a strong, capable workforce with a specialist skillset. I
want to assure everyone that we have taken those comments on
board and are working hard to make the reforms a reality.
I want first to talk about the specialists who work so hard to
provide extra support. They will be key to ensuring that we can
do what we need to do for these young people. The right hon.
Member for Hayes and Harlington () rightly mentioned the
importance of educational psychologists and children getting
through the EHCP process. He mentioned that educational
psychologists can provide professional advice to children and
young people and drive better life outcomes. I completely agree
with his emphasis on them. He is also right that I used to be a
Treasury PPS; I had fewer opportunities to agree with him then,
so it is nice to be able to do so today. We have announced an
additional £21 million to train more educational psychologists.
We increased the number of people coming through the system in
2020 and, because of the training time, some of those people are
coming through now. He is right that this issue will be crucial
in ensuring that we can meet needs.
It is also important—I will touch on this later—to improve
broader teacher confidence. In the case of something such as
speech and language support, if we had better confidence and
evidence-based interventions in mainstream settings, we would
have a reduced need for educational psychologists and EHCPs.
All of us will assist the Minister through representations to the
Treasury about the required early investment that eventually
saves money further downstream. I am happy to engage in any
lobbying of Treasury Ministers to get that message across, as
some of them have not yet fully grasped it.
I thank the right hon. Gentleman, but I would slightly disagree
with him. When I was in the Treasury in 2019, I worked on the
increase, which we are starting to see, in the high needs funding
block, which has gone up by 50%. There is also the £2.6 billion
that we are spending on specialist places and the £20 million,
which I have mentioned, that we have set out for educational
psychologists. We have backed a lot of reforms with funding over
the past few years, but I will gladly work with him on anything
in this area.
We have also committed to working with the Department of Health
on a joint approach. The hon. Member for Swansea West talked
about engaging with the specialist sector in health, and we are
definitely planning to do that. We do not want to reinvent the
wheel; we want to work with people who have expertise in this
area.
Access to speech and language therapy has rightly been mentioned.
I know the hon. Member for Swansea West has a deep expertise in
that, and I am particularly passionate about it. In the
improvement plan, we announced that we will partner with NHS
England to include early language and support for every child
pathfinders within our £70 million change programme. My hon.
Friend the Member for North West Norfolk () mentioned meeting to discuss
that, and I would be delighted to do so. The plan for those
pathfinders is that they will trial new ways of working to better
identify and support children with speech and language
communication needs. We are also looking at family hubs. We have
support for Nuffield early language intervention in primary
schools, and we are putting support in place with home learning
environments. In 2020, there were 620 acceptances to speech and
language therapy programmes in England. That was an increase of
28% from 2019. We are working with the NHS on a long-term plan,
which will look at therapists, and we are also working on the
steering group that we will set up this year.
On the mainstream workforce, my hon. Friend the Member for
Wantage (), whom I am meeting later
today to discuss this issue, rightly said that inclusive schools
make for an inclusive society. We will be looking at the initial
teacher training framework and early career framework, but,
importantly, we are setting out best practice guides, starting
with autism, mental health and wellbeing and early language, to
ensure that the wider workforce all have that specialist ability
as well. It is really important to understand different
conditions and what can be done.
Members have mentioned that we are introducing the new SENDCO
NPQ, which will replace the existing qualification That will be
Ofsted and Education Endowment Foundation assured. Members,
including the hon. Member for York Central (), have mentioned teaching
assistants. The Chair of the Education Committee, my hon. Friend
the Member for Worcester (Mr Walker), mentioned his sister.
Teaching assistants are vital. We are starting a research project
to develop our evidence base on current school approaches, demand
and best practice.
Our specialist schools face a challenge because they must have
very large numbers of teaching assistants to provide individual
support for pupils, so when funding increases to reflect pay
awards in the teaching space, it does not keep pace with the
increases for teaching assistants. In her conversations with the
Treasury, will the Minister ensure that it understands that
specific challenge and ensure that, as we see the welcome rise in
the living wage, our specialist education sector is supported
with the cost of that? They are very real costs and are
needed.
I will happily go away and look at that, but I would also make a
point on the additional funding we have put into the mainstream
sector so that it can cope with all sorts of rises in demands and
costs.
As well as setting out best practice guides, we are training
5,000 early years special educational needs co-ordinators to help
with early identification. One thing I have found from
early-years settings is that there is a real desire to know more
about this area. That is very welcome.
A couple of Members mentioned the transition stage into
adulthood. I have visited some excellent places recently,
including Weston College, which is a centre for excellence, and
the Orpheus Centre in my own constituency, which is trying to
build that sense of independence in our young people as they
reach adulthood. We have also heard mention of teachers of the
deaf, and I am really delighted that we have been working with
the National Deaf Children’s Society to deliver that
apprenticeship, which will be very helpful, particularly because
it attracts levy funding.
I would like to turn briefly to mental health, which has been a
real challenge. We have been working very closely with the NHS on
this. It is investing a lot of money for hundreds of thousands of
extra children. We know this is a difficult area, which is why
one of our first best-practice guides will be on this topic. We
will also roll out mental health support teams in schools.
In mental health diagnosis, it is often thought that someone has
a mental health problem when, in fact, they have a speech and
language problem. Will the Minister think about ensuring that,
when these assessments are made, particularly when people are
actually incarcerated, speech and language therapists are on hand
to ensure that there is no misdiagnosis?
I will happily look at that, and raise it in my conversations
with Health. That is quite right. There are lots of other issues
as well, particularly autism in girls. A mental health challenge
is often diagnosed when, actually, if the underlying autism were
addressed, outcomes for young people would be improved.
I will close on this, so that the hon. Member for Swansea West
has enough time. I am sure he will want to say quite a lot.
Improving access to the right professionals, whether they are
teachers, teaching assistants or the specialists we have talked a
lot about today is a key part of our plans for reform. I thank
everyone who has brought this matter forward for their detailed
stories.
I was hoping the Minister might deal with this—I requested that
she share conclusions in relation to the mainland with the
relevant Department and with the Minister back home.
I would be delighted to talk to the relevant Department and the
hon. Gentleman’s Minister about how we can share best practice. I
know people rightly care about this area. Everyone here is
grateful for the work of all the professionals across the
education, health and care systems who work tirelessly to support
our children and young people.
10.55am
I have a surprising amount of time, but I will not take all of
it. First, I would like to thank everybody who took part in the
debate, with consensus about this massively important issue,
which affects 1.5 million people across Britain. We welcome the
Minister’s sentiments. The point has been made that we need to
speed up and deliver for the people who are seeing their
children’s life chances ebbing away in many cases, as we
speak.
Since my hon. Friend has a couple of minutes, one issue raised by
the Minister was the role of the voluntary sector. I know he was
speaking on behalf of a coalition of groups, but one issue we
have not examined is the funding of those individual
organisations. Many of us have concerns about the drying-up of
funding from local government to the voluntary sector. We might
now need to put that back on the agenda in discussions with the
Minister.
We all know money is tight. As has been said, core funding to
local authorities has been cut. It may be that many members of
that coalition could do a lot more with additional funding, so
that it would go further than it would by giving to it to other
organisations. Clearly, that is not a perfect situation. We also
heard about the importance of teaching assistants. It is a
failure of budget management to reduce the amount of support for
teaching assistants, who are on the frontline.
Coming back to the point about timing, voluntary organisations,
teaching assistants and existing provision need to be supported
now, as we support a strategy to move forward on training a
specialist workforce. We are looking at designing what we hope
will be a very good system as we move forward in the next couple
of years. In the meantime, we need to deliver on the ground. I
pay tribute to the 1,800 people who contributed to this debate.
There would have been thousands more, if they had known about it.
They want to tell us about their child. Everybody looking at
their child’s needs is frustrated, saying that Jane, John or
whoever, has needs that are not being addressed, and the
deterioration is clear.
We have heard examples of cases where the lack of early
intervention meant greater intervention at higher cost later. As
we have discussed, downstream we end up with lower life chances,
lower tax revenues and higher social costs, a lot of which is
avoidable. We need to work together to speed up the system. The
people in this room and beyond would be happy to lobby Government
about priorities and timing, to support the Minister to bring
forward more ambitious and quicker action. That would support so
many people and make such a difference to their lives. Thank you
all.
Question put and agreed to.
|