Richard Burgon (Leeds East) (Ind) I beg to move, That this House
has considered SEND provision. It is a great pleasure to serve
under your chairship, Mr Betts. I am delighted to have secured this
debate and to see such a packed Westminster Hall. I start by
thanking all the parents and campaigners who have rightly put this
issue high on the agenda, all the organisations that have provided
briefings for MPs, and of course all the MPs here in a packed
Westminster Hall....Request free trial
(Leeds East) (Ind)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered SEND provision.
It is a great pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Betts. I
am delighted to have secured this debate and to see such a packed
Westminster Hall. I start by thanking all the parents and
campaigners who have rightly put this issue high on the agenda,
all the organisations that have provided briefings for MPs, and
of course all the MPs here in a packed Westminster Hall.
Nearly 50 MPs have applied to speak today; I cannot recall
anything like that for many other Westminster Hall debates. I
hope that the Government and all those with a say over the
parliamentary agenda take note and ensure time for a much longer
debate on this vital issue very soon. This is an essential
debate. The crisis in SEND provision is one of the biggest messes
left by the previous Government—one that the new Labour
Government will have to start to clear up quickly, as SEND needs
are likely only to increase. That will require a radically
different approach from the one currently failing so many
children.
We cannot have this debate today without acknowledging how the
crisis was deepened by an austerity agenda that tore up much of
the social fabric that once would have offered pupils and their
families much of the support needed. That dangerous idea has
hollowed out councils' budgets and severely restricted the
services that they can provide. It has caused long-term harm to
the NHS, including huge waiting lists for assessments and massive
backlogs in mental health services. It has placed unbearable
pressure on schools, which are asked to do more and more with
fewer and fewer staff and resources. It has caused key public
workers to leave due to stress, simply impossible workloads and
low pay, further weakening services.
(Tamworth) (Lab)
I congratulate my hon. Friend on securing such an important
debate in such a full Westminster Hall. Since 2010 schools have
been grappling with chronic underinvestment by former
Conservative Governments. We know that those with special
educational needs and disabilities have borne the brunt of that.
Schools are expected to pick up the pieces without the proper
support. Does he agree that we need to build capacity and
expertise in the mainstream system so that more children can
access the universal and targeted support that they need?
My hon. Friend puts it very well; I could not agree more. There
is an old saying that it takes a village to raise a child. Well,
so many of the key services that we had in our communities to
help support child development are on their knees due to
austerity, and children are paying the price.
Every MP in this House is aware that the special education needs
and disability system has gone beyond crisis and is in
emergency.
Sir (Goole and Pocklington)
(Con)
The hon. Gentleman will remember that we had a debate like this
one in the main Chamber, and there was record demand—that tells
the Government something. He is right that there is not enough
money for SEND generally, but it is also distributed very badly.
In my constituency we get £900 per child from central Government
versus, let us say, Camden's £3,500. That means that we have
delays of two, three or four years—education, health and care
plans not delivered, places not delivered and therapy not
delivered. If we do not solve both issues, we will not solve
either of them.
I very much agree with the right hon. Gentleman, who makes the
point—among other points—that this is a holistic issue: unless we
solve all the interconnected root causes of the SEND crisis, we
will never solve the crisis at all.
We have all had so many heartbreaking constituency cases. For
this debate, I asked on social media for people to send in their
case studies, and I was inundated with cases from right across
the country. I will not be able to cite them all today, but I
have read them all and they form the basis of what I will say
today.
(Strangford) (DUP)
May I congratulate the hon. Gentleman and suggest that, given the
turnout, this debate could well be held in the main Chamber and
should last at least three hours? I commend him on bringing this
issue forward. I support him in doing so.
Obviously, the Minister does not have to respond for Northern
Ireland, but in Northern Ireland, SEND pupils form some 20% of
the school population and the budget that we spend is in excess
of £500 million per year. It does not go anywhere near meeting
the demand, so does the hon. Gentleman agree that we need more
placements, more teachers, more places in school as well and,
ultimately, better funding? We must not leave behind the SEND
children whom we all represent in this Chamber.
The hon. Gentleman puts it very well indeed.
This crisis is a result of many factors, which others will no
doubt give more detail on in today's debate, but at its core is
the mishandling, I would argue, of the Children and Families Act
2014. Its aims—the widening of access to SEND support and the
promotion of a more integrated approach, involving health,
education and social care—were laudable, but the reality has
proved otherwise. Since 2014, the number of pupils with special
educational needs and disabilities has increased to 1.7 million.
That is one in six pupils.
(Telford) (Lab)
I congratulate the hon. Gentleman on bringing this debate
forward. As well as more money, better use of money is key. We
have seen a huge reduction in the amount of money being spent in
primary schools for speech and language therapy, which then costs
the system far more in secondary school, as well as, of course,
meaning worse outcomes for children across our country. Does he
agree?
I certainly agree with my hon. Friend, because early intervention
is so important, both in giving adequate and timely support to
young people and, in the long run, in keeping the costs down;
without early intervention, the problems that children face can
only get worse and worse. The number needing more support through
an education, health and care plan has more than doubled, but the
required resources have, as others have said, simply not
followed.
(Chelmsford) (LD)
I thank the hon. Gentleman for this debate about an issue that is
so important and has filled my inbox over many months, as I am
sure is the case for other hon. Members here. The hon. Gentleman
mentioned that the eligibility changed in 2014 with the Children
and Families Act; it added an extra 11 years when it comes to the
children and young people who could be included. Does he agree
that it was a complete failure of subsequent Governments not to
put in the extra resources to match the additional number of
years? That has led to a perverse system in which we now see
local authorities battling with parents—using not just normal
barristers but King's Counsel, so sure are they of their
righteousness in their battle. With the help of barristers,
including KCs, they are battling parents who are often not
represented legally and have to represent themselves. Does the
hon. Gentleman agree that that is perverse and should never have
happened?
I thank the hon. Member: that is a very important point, and I
certainly agree. I will turn later in my speech to the subject of
the tribunals. When we look at the statistics on the outcome of
the tribunal hearings, that underlines her point very strongly
indeed.
I will make a bit of progress if that is okay. If others wish to
seek to intervene, I will take some interventions again later,
before the end of my speech. Greater need and inadequate funding
are a recipe for disaster, and a disaster is exactly what has
happened. In my 10 minutes, I cannot touch on every example of
this crisis—
(Blyth and Ashington) (Lab)
Will my hon. Friend give way?
I will, and then I will make some progress.
I congratulate my hon. Friend on bringing this really important
issue to the Chamber. Does he agree that, despite the huge
increase in EHCPs, investment in mainstream and special
educational needs schools has been drastically cut? That is
having a huge impact, mainly on mainstream schools that are
trying to back-fill the provision for special educational needs
pupils in our areas. Society is often measured by the way—
Mr (in the Chair)
Order. A lot of people are down to speak, so please keep
interventions brief.
My hon. Friend makes his point well and passionately. He is
correct; that is what parents and people who work in our schools
have been saying to me.
I will highlight some of the most appalling statistics. More than
half of SEND pupils have been forced to take time out of school
due to a lack of proper provision, and some children are missing
years of schooling. Two in three special schools are at or over
capacity; there are 4,000 more pupils on roll than the reported
capacity. There are eye-watering delays for children to get their
education, health and care assessments and plans, and fewer than
half of the plans are issued within the 20-week legal limit.
Nearly a third of parents whose children have special needs have
had to resort to the legal system to get them the support they
need, and many have spent thousands of pounds to do so. Seven out
of eight teachers and 99% of school leaders say that SEND
resources are insufficient to meet the needs of our children,
according to National Education Union and National Association of
Head Teachers staff surveys. Councils face huge SEND deficits,
which now stand at £3.2 billion but are expected to reach £5
billion by 2026. The core £10,000 sum that special needs schools
receive on a per-pupil basis has been frozen since 2013, despite
spiralling inflation. That cost them hundreds of millions of
pounds last year alone. I could go on and on, but that alone is a
damning indictment of the system.
Child neglect is defined as:
“the persistent failure to meet a child's basic physical and/or
psychological needs, likely to result in the serious impairment
of the child's health or development.”
That is what this failure is, and we should be deeply angry that
children are being neglected in such a way.
The SEND crisis is part of the wider crisis in education. There
are too few teaching assistants, too few educational
psychologists, too few special school places, and Sure Starts
have been closed. All that and more means that schools are unable
to provide the support that children need. It means that
effective early interventions are not possible; that can deepen
children's needs with the result that they require more costly
support. When schools face such difficulties, talk of bringing
more children into mainstream schools, rather than specialist
provision, is just empty rhetoric. All that is exacerbated by
national curriculum changes, a much more rigid, prescriptive
focus to learning and a greater emphasis on performance measures
that simply do not provide the flexibility needed for genuinely
inclusive education. We cannot solve this crisis by looking at
the SEND system in isolation; we have to consider the wider
education system as a whole.
(Thurrock) (Lab)
My hon. Friend mentions the staffing crisis in the SEND system,
but I want to note that there is also a crisis in recruitment and
training for teachers of the deaf. From my experience, I know
that is a key role for a number of deaf children, particularly in
my constituency. There is a real crisis in back-filling those
positions and recruiting across councils, particularly at a
unitary level. The need for teachers of the deaf is not reflected
in those coming through the system, which often results in
children not having the resource and help they need to succeed in
school.
My hon. Friend is exactly correct, and I am delighted that she
has put on record the contribution of teachers of the deaf and
the situation in terms of their recruitment.
The current situation is working for no one; not for children,
not for parents, not for teachers, not for children without SEN
and not for local authorities. The last Government's approach
pitted parents against local authorities, and they failed to take
responsibility. That has created a completely adversarial system,
with ever more cases going to tribunal—there were 14,000 cases
last year alone, up fourfold since 2014. Parents win in 98% of
cases, but it is exhausting and often traumatic for them, as well
as a complete waste of money.
Even then, the right support often does not follow. At times,
that is due to local authorities being cut to the bone and their
lack of effective mechanisms to hold schools to account,
especially since academisation. Of course, that is only the tip
of the iceberg, as so many parents simply do not have the time,
energy or money to undertake legal action. The Government have a
duty to end that blame game by addressing the root causes of the
crisis: the failed policies that got us here.
As I draw to a close, I want to make a point about increasing
attempts to shift the blame to parents, with stories blaming
so-called pushy parents, a former Minister accusing parents of
abusing the SEND tribunal scheme, and other powerful people
calling for parents to make fewer demands.
(Wirral West) (Lab)
My hon. Friend mentioned that 98% of parents who make an appeal
are successful. Does he share my concern that that suggests that
parents who should be supported are instead encountering a system
that layers uncertainty and stress on an already difficult and
stressful situation? On the Wirral, we do not need to see
inspection results to know that parents feel failed and let down.
Does my hon. Friend believe that we need to do more to support
and challenge councils, to ensure that there is a better system
for parents and their children who, in a time of need, feel that
they are too often met with rejection and failure?
My hon. Friend makes that point very well on behalf of his
constituents in the Wirral, and I completely agree. What a
trauma! It is trauma piled upon trauma, as parents are forced
through this adversarial system, with all they are going through,
struggling to get the best for their children—and the best is
what our children need and deserve.
I suspect that the blame game of unfairly calling parents “pushy”
was all part of a strategy by some in the last Government to
blame the system breakdown on too much demand for special
education provision and to claim that that demand must somehow be
suppressed rather than met. I fear that those who promoted that
view could even have been looking to water down the legal
entitlements of children with education, health and care plans.
Our new Government need to ensure—as I am sure they will—that
that demonising of parents is challenged.
To conclude, the dire picture I have painted today is not
inevitable; the system can be fixed and children can get the
education they need and deserve. That requires improvements in
SEND training for teachers, and special educational needs
co-ordinators having time to focus on doing their job. It
requires many more support staff in school, which means proper
pay. It requires changes to the curriculum and to the way in
which our education is so focused on tests and league tables,
which means that there is pressure to off-roll SEND pupils. It
requires genuine early intervention, including the restoration of
Sure Start. It requires the scrapping of the safety valve scheme
and the writing-off of local authority debts. And, of course, it
requires cash. I note that the f40 group believes that the high
needs block alone requires an additional £4.6 billion a year just
to prevent the crisis from getting worse.
I know that many hon. Members want to speak today. I am delighted
that the new Education Secretary has recognised that there is a
crisis in SEND provision, because the first step in solving a
crisis is to recognise that there is one. I hope that this
exercise—going into this debate, continuing through this debate
and following this debate—can be part of getting a grip and
turning the page on a situation in which so many children are not
getting the support and education they deserve in order to fulfil
their potential for a happy life, which is something all our
children deserve.
Mr (in the Chair)
Obviously, a lot of Members want to get in. We have 40 minutes,
so I am going to impose a time limit of three minutes. Please do
not take more than one intervention, because that lengthens the
time. Interventions should be to the point; they should not be
speeches. If you make an intervention, you will not get called to
speak as well. Off we go: I call Dr .
3.20pm
Dr (Solihull West and
Shirley) (Con)
It is a privilege to speak under your chairmanship today, Mr
Betts. I thank the hon. Member for Leeds East () for tabling this important
debate.
I wish to place on record my gratitude to all the teachers in my
constituency for the work they do and—in the spirit of this
debate—to the teachers and staff at Hazel Oak and Reynalds Cross,
the two maintained special schools in Solihull West and Shirley.
I particularly want to single out the parents of children with
special educational needs, who often strive so incredibly hard to
achieve the best for their children. In January 2022, there were
2,023 Solihull residents with an EHCP—a 16.1% increase on the
year before.
(Chester South and
Eddisbury) (Con)
Despite legislation requiring a final education, health and care
plan to be in place within 20 weeks of an initial assessment,
Cheshire West and Chester council is putting in place just 6.5%
within that time, which is fewer than one in 15 children. Too
many children in my constituency are being let down by the
Cheshire Labour councils, so I want to highlight the work of the
CWaC SEND Accountability group in bringing families together on
this issue. Does my hon. Friend agree that a more efficient EHCP
system is crucial in delivering for SEND children and their
parents?
Dr Shastri-Hurst
My hon. Friend is entirely right; the delays in EHCP assessments
are a hindrance to a child's access to the national curriculum.
We are failing them by not doing those assessments in a timely
manner, and we need to improve on that. I agree with her comments
entirely.
A constituent has told me that the nearest school with the
necessary facilities for her son is 31 miles away. That means
that she and her child have had to settle for a school that is
not fully equipped for his needs, simply due to geography. My
constituency surgery, like those of other Members, is regularly
visited by parents with similar cases. Evidently, the current
system is not working.
Therefore, I wish to propose three changes that I believe will
lead to a significant improvement for schools and families
affected by SEND provision. The first is something that everybody
in this room is already leading on: raising awareness of SEND. It
is heartening to see so many Members engaging with this topic,
and it is only by doing that, and by educating ourselves and
others, that we can hope to make a change for the better.
The second is identifying children with special educational needs
at an early age, which is vital to maximising their life chances.
That is why I would like to see better training and resources
provided to teachers to help with earlier detection.
(Shipley) (Lab)
Will the hon. Member give way?
Dr Shastri-Hurst
I will not give way, purely because of the amount I have to get
through in the time.
Aside from family members, children spend most of their
developing lives with their teachers. It is important that the
teaching curriculum is sufficiently flexible to enable children
to reach their true potential.
I would also like to make special reference to those military
families whose children suffer from special educational needs.
Having served in the military myself, I know of several families
who have encountered adverse effects as a result. With regular
school moves, often between different local authorities, there is
an inevitable need to reapply for an EHCP, thereby delaying
access to the provision that is so desperately needed.
My final request to the Minister comes as no surprise: to achieve
all these improvements, it is important that local authorities
receive the funding they need. In particular, I ask that my own
council receive its fair share of funding, because Solihull
council presently takes in SEND children from Birmingham but
receives much less funding per pupil. That matter needs to be
rectified.
Those three things—awareness, training and funding—will have a
real, tangible impact on young people, their families and their
life chances.
3.25pm
(York Central)
(Lab/Co-op)
It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair, Mr Betts. What a
mess—young people broken by a broken system. The Children and
Families Act promised so much, but without people, money and the
rest of the system to back it up, it could never deliver. When
the wait for the diagnosis is over, the battle for the EHCP is
won and masses of resources have been spent, the demand is still
not being met. Staff do their very best, but still people are
falling out of the system.
I have spent the past year digging deep, looking at the local,
the national and the international to bring best practice to this
space. I have looked at the environment, the community and the
child. On the environment, I say to the Minister, “Go back to the
Department and rip up the behaviourist approach to education. It
creates a world where neurodiverse children—those with anxiety or
mental illness—and even the timid cannot survive.”
Instead, we should adopt a therapeutic, nurturing approach so
that all children can thrive. In York, where schools have done
so, all gain from recognising the need for every child to be
safe, valued and included. It is a happy place where a child will
strive for excellence and the whole child will be able to
navigate their way through this world, rather than an obstacle
course of micro-traumas, stress and anxiety. Let us not build
bigger and bigger schools, but create more therapeutic and
intimate spaces that belong to the children and where they can
thrive. We should bring children out of home schooling, out of
their bedrooms, off the streets and back into the classroom.
School must be safe for all those children.
We also need to recognise, as the Government do, the failed
nature of the curriculum. Let us build space for our brains and
our bodies. Are we really shocked that young people are failing
when only half of them is engaged? We have cut out arts, music,
sports, nature, dance, play, exploration, wonder and fun. Yet all
children, especially those with SEND, benefit from that
balance.
When I visited Sweden, I went into schools to hear about what
they were doing. They brought people into the heart of the
school, not prescribing from an EHCP but taking a whole-child and
a whole-school approach, using the skills of psychologists,
teachers, occupational therapists, physios and speech therapists
for all children. Let us recognise that school community and
ensure that we value its members. Our teaching assistants do so
much of the work, yet their pay is so poor—that must be
addressed.
Will my hon. Friend give way?
I am going to continue.
As for parents, I have seen them pushed away and gaslit, when
they should instead be integrated into the heart of the school,
as they are in Sweden, leading on what their child needs. When it
comes to the children themselves, let us review the purpose of
education: preparing children for the world today, not breaking
and testing them. Children with SEND struggle in that environment
just to satisfy the need for data for Governments and to meet
different goals. We need every child to flourish, and that is why
we need to think again.
3.28pm
Dame (Gosport) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your stewardship, Mr Betts, and I
congratulate the hon. Member for Leeds East () on securing the debate. I
suppose that the best place to start, in the time permitted to
me, is the beginning. For a child who needs targeted, tailored
support, early identification can make a world of difference,
because the impact of failing to spot a child with additional
needs can be severe and far-reaching. Early intervention means
life-altering adaptations in the way teachers interact and
communicate with them and in the way they are supported, reducing
the need for EHCPs and one-to-one support and improving academic
outcomes, life chances, wellbeing and happiness, which are
obviously crucial.
Spotting children with SEND—particularly autistic children and
especially autistic girls—can be difficult, and there is
insufficient training at the moment to enable teachers to do
that. There are around 200,000 autistic children in England. The
majority are in mainstream education, but the National Autistic
Society reports that, staggeringly, only a quarter feel happy at
school. That is why some parents take the drastic step of paying
for private education that they can ill afford, because they need
education that addresses their child's needs.
The effect on a neurodivergent child of being in the wrong
education setting can be devastating. In March, The Guardian
reported that nearly 20,000 autistic children are persistently
absent from school, with Ambitious about Autism reporting that
four in five of them experience mental health issues.
I have a suggestion for the Minister. According to the National
Autistic Society, three quarters of parents said that their
child's school place did not meet their needs. Teachers do a
remarkable job, but they need to be equipped with the very best
tools and advice to give their pupils the very best possible
chance of learning in a happy, safe, well cared-for environment.
Currently, only one in seven schoolteachers have received any
form of autism training, and 70% of children say school would be
better if teachers understood them.
There are not enough SEND school places, but as a Health and
Social Care Minister I started work on introducing the Oliver
McGowan mandatory training for health and care staff, which the
Minister knows about. It equips health and care professionals
with the skills, knowledge and understanding of autistic people
and those with learning disabilities. It is delivered by autistic
people and people with learning disabilities—experts by
experience who get paid to do it. It is really effective, with
84% of participants saying they feel more confident in their
work. Today, it was shortlisted for an NHS parliamentary award.
Will the Minister meet Paula McGowan and look at whether this
could assist teachers? Using that training in an educational
setting would improve the way in which teaching professionals can
support autistic children and those with learning
disabilities.
3.31pm
(Portsmouth North) (Lab)
I thank the hon. Member for Leeds East () for securing this vital
debate. As a former teacher, I have witnessed everything heard in
today's debate, and I will not need to repeat it. I will make a
few points in the time that I have. In my city, like others, we
have had a 30% increase in our EHCPs. Somebody mentioned
extending the 11 years of provision; at 16, those kids just drop
off. What happens to them, and how do we support them?
The EHCP increase has led to a constituent's child waiting 40
weeks for their EHCP to be turned around, which has left them
with no secondary school place in the first week of term. We
should be allowing these children to select their secondary
school places a year earlier to give them time to transition,
meet the staff, and grow their awareness of and engagement with
the school community. As I was a teacher before coming into this
role, I always look at solutions; that is one of them.
Another solution involves the Government using the resources
raised from ending the tax break for private schools to fund
evidence-based early speech and language support in our primary
schools. We must ensure that Ofsted's new report card has
inclusion as part of the report, so that we can see what our
schools are doing. We must ensure that teacher training
entitlements and annual CPD—continuing professional
development—for all staff in education include SEND. Mental
health support should be increased. If we are really going to
look at EHCPs, pupils' records should be kept properly so that
they follow them when they move on to their next phase of life,
whether that is education or the workplace.
Finally, I want to highlight Trafalgar school in my constituency,
which is a fully restorative practice school. We need to look at
using innovative projects such as that around the country to let
children have an inclusive education that is also inclusive for
them personally.
3.33pm
(Tatton) (Con)
I thank the hon. Member for Leeds East () for securing this important
debate. I know time is tight, so I will keep to a couple of very
specific points. One such point is on the Government's plans to
add VAT to private schools and how that will affect SEND
provision. My first question to the Minister is this: what impact
assessment did the Government carry out, with regard to the VAT
changes to private schools, of the effect on children with
special educational needs and on SEND school places? If the
Government have done an impact assessment, will they publish it,
and if they did not, why on earth not? I appreciate that the
Minister might not be able to answer that question here and now,
but I see the officials are in the room behind her, so I am happy
for that to be sent to me.
As I understand it, the Government policy is not to impose VAT on
private school places where the school place is allocated on the
basis of an EHCP. However, there will be very many children with
special educational needs who have not yet secured such a plan,
and so VAT will apply.
Will my right hon. Friend give way?
Not at the moment.
We know that families have to go through a rigorous set of tests
to obtain an EHCP, often ending in an appeal or taking many weeks
to be finalised. In those cases where the plan has not been
finalised, parents will have to make the difficult decision
whether to send their child to an independent school. In those
instances there will be a significant uplift in those pupils'
fees—a massive worry for parents. Some will now no longer be able
to afford the fees. We can only imagine their guilt and concern.
What are they going to do? Will they have to stop their child's
progress at that school? Will the child need to leave that
school?
How can it be fair that a child who is delayed in the education,
health and care plan process, through no fault of their own,
faces VAT costs, while another child who has secured their EHCP
in time does not have that burden? Could the Minister explain
that unfairness that the Government have now introduced into the
system, and whether they plan to put a stop to it as soon as
possible? In light of that unfairness, I urge the Government to
look at what steps can be taken to reduce the time that the
assessments for an EHCP take, more generally.
There are three local authorities in my constituency, all of
which consistently go beyond the legal timeframe. I asked
Cheshire West SEND accountability group for parents how long the
EHCP process takes. Legally, it should take only 20 weeks, but
some have waited more than 60 weeks. Anecdotally, they say on
average it is taking 30 to 50 weeks—
Mr (in the Chair)
Order. I call .
3.36pm
Mrs (Washington and Gateshead
South) (Lab)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship today, Mr
Betts. I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds East
() on securing this very
important debate.
It has been widely noted that SEND provision came up
significantly on the doorsteps during the general election. The
statement from the then Conservative Education Secretary earlier
this year that SEND provision had reached a crisis point only
further reinforced what we already knew—but it was under their
watch.
No one wants to say, “I told you so,” but as the shadow Minister
during the passage of the Bill that became the Children and
Families Act 2014—the Act that brought in education, health and
care plans—I did, many times. This crisis is exactly what I, as
shadow Minister, along with many from the education, voluntary
and charity sectors who supported me with many amendments, all
predicted. The crisis we are in now was entirely predictable. It
is a damning indictment that, after 14 years in power, this is
the state that the Conservatives left SEND provision in.
Between 2019 and 2023, the number of EHCPs issued rose by 72%,
but shockingly, dedicated SEND funding only rose by 42%. That is
just one stat of many that I could give. The lack of funding, the
delays and the de-prioritisation of children with SEND is a stain
on our society.
I know from the challenges I face in my own family that the
impact on children's self-confidence, self-esteem and education
can be life-changing. I, like many here, have had first-hand
experience of the impact that underfunded and disjointed SEND
support can have, because my son Joseph is severely dyslexic. His
experience opened my eyes and has given me a lifelong passion,
throughout my 19 years as an MP, to do something about the
challenges that children with SEND experience in accessing
support, and the variation in the quality of support that
children experience across the country. It really is a postcode
lottery.
Joseph was eventually statemented aged 10. I will not go into his
journey, but two decades on, children who are now entering the
education system are having the same experiences as he did.
Nothing has improved. I have had many conversations with the
British Dyslexia Association recently—I was chair of the
all-party parliamentary group for dyslexia and other specific
learning difficulties. One of the reasons that teachers struggle
is the lack of training. Due to time I cannot expand on that, but
I am sure others will.
3.39pm
(Harpenden and
Berkhamsted) (LD)
I thank the hon. Member for Leeds East () for securing such an
important debate.
An Ofsted report for Hertfordshire deemed that there were
widespread systemic failings in the county, and that the area had
not acted with the necessary urgency to address long-standing,
systemic and significant weaknesses in the area of special
educational needs and disability provision. This is reflected
again and again in the heartbreaking stories of families across
Harpenden and Berkhamsted being let down by a broken system.
One of my constituents, Charlotte, is a parent to three children,
all with EHCPs and complex SEND needs. Being in constant battle
mode has become the norm for Charlotte and her family in securing
educational support, and it has resulted in her eldest child
having to travel almost 100 miles a day to get to school. The
emotional wellbeing of Charlotte and her children has taken a
toll, and her youngest child has barely attended school since
October 2023.
Although progress is being made, there is still much more work to
do. We have been let down by not only Conservative-led
Hertfordshire county council but a flawed national funding
formula inherited from the previous Conservative Government. The
formula means that children in Hertfordshire receive far less
funding per head than in neighbouring Buckinghamshire.
Hertfordshire is the third-lowest-funded authority per head for
higher needs funding and would receive £85 million more per annum
if funded at the same rate as its neighbour.
(Chichester) (LD)
With only 3.6% of EHCPs in Conservative-led West Sussex county
council being delivered within the statutory 20-week framework,
does my hon. Friend agree that funding, which is currently a
postcode lottery, needs to be reviewed across the country?
My hon. Friend took the words right out of my mouth. At the
current rate in Hertfordshire it would take 15 years to achieve
parity between the two counties. This is a lost generation. A
three-year-old in Hertfordshire today with SEND needs would have
to finish all their formal education before they would get equal
funding to a similar child in Buckinghamshire. The formula has
created a postcode lottery for pupils with special educational
needs, and it is unacceptable.
Most importantly, we should listen to the experience of local
families to truly understand the human cost of the outdated
formula. Unfortunately, stories such as Charlotte's are not
isolated cases, as goes for much of what will be shared today.
The formula has pushed many families away from their local
communities and support networks and into the minefield that is
SEND provision. The funding formula must move with the times. It
must be updated to reflect the present, increasing demand. So I
ask the Minister: when will the Government change the funding
formula to reflect the current need?
3.42pm
(Plymouth Moor View) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Leeds East () for securing this important
debate. We have heard from many Members how dire the situation is
in their constituencies, but can we for a second celebrate the
incredible staff who already put so much effort and passion into
the provision they arrange for children? My first visit as an MP
was to Mill Ford school in Ernesettle in Plymouth, which supports
children and young adults with complex needs. I have to pay
tribute to the incredible staff there and congratulate Mill Ford
school on recently being rated as “outstanding” by Ofsted.
I am pleased that we are moving away from one-word Ofsted
ratings, because it is impossible to capture what Mill Ford does
for people in just one word. While visiting Mill Ford, we stopped
by their daily singalong in the hall. Pupils from all age groups
were having an incredible time, singing in various tunes and
volumes and quite literally jumping for joy. It was a fantastic
scene. Despite this, huge challenges remain. For example, at that
school the corridors are so narrow that two wheelchairs cannot be
wheeled past each other.
The situation in Plymouth is similar to that in many hon.
Members' constituencies, but some statistics we have already
heard do not match quite how dire it is. In Plymouth, 18.5% of
pupils have a SEND need—well above the national figure of 13%.
The number of children and young people with an EHCP in Plymouth
has increased since 2010 by 125%—more than doubled. We know that
there is no quick fix for the crisis in SEND. Special educational
needs are complex and wide-ranging, so they require complex and
wide-ranging solutions. We need to listen carefully to education
professionals, support staff and especially those with lived
experience of SEND as we move forward. I am proud that I ran for
Parliament on a manifesto that pledged to take a community-wide
approach to special educational needs, improving inclusivity in
mainstream schools as well as ensuring that special schools are
fit for purpose.
As in my hon. Friend's constituency, in Shipley the number of
pupils with SEND has increased again this year. It is putting
huge pressure on our teachers and teaching assistants in
mainstream schools. Does he agree that the cuts to school funding
under the previous Government have contributed to the problem,
and that further steps need to be taken to ensure appropriate
training for all our school staff, particularly those in
mainstream schools?
I completely agree with my hon. Friend's point about the funding
cuts. I was going to respond to a point made by the right hon.
Member for Tatton (), but I removed it from my
contribution due to the time constraints. She asked earlier
whether the Government had conducted feasibility studies on the
removal of VAT exemptions from private schools. I would respond
by asking whether the previous Government, which we had since
2010, conducted feasibility studies on SEND when they made deep
cuts to education.
I started by speaking about the fantastic Mill Ford special
school in Plymouth Moor View. Expanding capacity at Mill Ford is
central to Plymouth city council's plan to address the SEND
crisis, but it is much harder to access funding to replace or
rebuild a school than it is to build new schools. Will the
Minister commit to working with me to help expand capacity at
Plymouth Moor View's special schools?
3.46pm
(Thornbury and Yate) (LD)
I thank the hon. Member for Leeds East () for securing this debate.
Before I start, I draw attention to my entry in the Register of
Members' Financial Interests, as I am still a South
Gloucestershire councillor.
Right across the country, children with special educational needs
and disabilities are being let down, and parents are at their
wits' end trying to navigate the system. The SEND funding model
is utterly broken, leaving local councils and schools unable to
provide the learning environments our children need.
I want to highlight three particular problems. The first relates
to the safety valve agreements put in place to support local
authorities that are struggling the most to deliver these
important services. I know as the former leader of South
Gloucestershire council that the targets that were set
pre-pandemic fail to reflect the massively rising demand we have
faced since, meaning they are no longer fit for purpose and need
to be reviewed. I look forward to hearing the Minister outline
what steps the Government will take immediately to do that.
Secondly, I want to highlight the punitive approach taken to
school absence in this country. If a child's needs are not being
met at school, it can lead to their being unable to attend.
Parents who have been fighting hard to get their child the
support they need can then face the added burden of threats of
fines or even imprisonment—talk about adding insult to injury.
Imagine the impact that has on parents who are already under huge
stress, who may be under financial pressure due to their
employment being affected by their additional caring
responsibilities, and who may feel compelled, against all their
parental instincts, to physically force their child into a
situation that is harming them. Above all, think of the impact on
the child, pressured to go into an inappropriate environment and
worried that bad things may happen to their parents.
Finally, I want to highlight the increasing use of alternatives
to exclusion, such as isolation and temporary moves to other
schools—measures that are not recorded and published in the same
way exclusions are, and not subject to the same safeguards. A
child who is struggling to learn in a classroom with a
subject-specialist teacher is highly unlikely to be able to do so
when sat in a room with a supervisor and some worksheets. A
neurodivergent child who thrives on routine will be distressed by
such a change, especially if it involves a move to an unfamiliar
school. In some schools the list of behaviour that is sanctioned
in this way could easily have been drawn from a diagnostic list
for ADHD or autism, so it seems inevitable that children who do
not have appropriate support in place will be subject to such
sanctions. There needs to be an urgent review of the use of such
measures, which can easily go under the radar.
In conclusion, we need action now from the Government to fix
these problems before the house of cards comes tumbling down,
starting with fixing the funding formula and reviewing all
existing safety valve agreements.
3.49pm
(Bracknell) (Lab)
On Saturday, I joined a group of SEND families in Bracknell to
hear their experiences of operating within a broken system. The
stories I heard from them, and those I have heard on the doorstep
and from Members here today, are heartbreaking. Children are
stuck on assessment waiting lists for months longer than they
should be. Parents have to juggle work around caring for kids who
are off school or find themselves repeatedly excluded because
their needs are not being met, and are then left struggling to
pay the bills.
There is inadequate provision in mainstream education, and there
are far too few state-maintained special schools to meet the
demand. As the previous Conservative Education Secretary
admitted, the system is “lose, lose, lose”; it is desperately in
need of reform.
(North West Cambridgeshire)
(Lab)
Does my hon. Friend agree that one of the very serious
consequences of the issues he is outlining is the problem of
non-elective home education, where parents feel forced to take
their children out of school entirely and feel they have no
option other than to educate them at home? Does he, like me,
welcome the measures in the proposed children's wellbeing Bill
that will require local authorities to set up and maintain
registers of children not in school so that we get a better sense
of the problem?
Absolutely. I was proud to highlight in my maiden speech the
issue of ghost children, who are missing out on education and too
often fall off the radar. That is a really important part of the
puzzle.
The Government have rightly placed education at the heart of
their programme for change and have a national mission to break
down the barriers to opportunity for all children. Nobody needs
that more than our SEND kids, who face significant barriers to
inclusion. This is a question of social mobility. How can we
ensure that, no matter a child's needs or background, they thrive
in school and into their adult life?
I could focus on many areas where improvement is desperately
needed, but one issue that is raised time and again by the
families I have spoken to in Bracknell—it has been raised by
Members here today, including the hon. Member for Gosport (Dame
) and my hon. Friend the
Member for Washington and Gateshead South (Mrs Hodgson), and I
experienced it in my previous career in education—is the lack of
adequate training about SEND in schools, both in initial teacher
training and as part of a teacher's continuing professional
development. That is why I was proud to stand on a Labour
manifesto that committed to introducing a new teacher training
entitlement to give teachers the time they need to learn skills
that will help them better support SEND kids. When I was a
teacher, time was always the most precious resource. I would like
to see the pledge include more targeted support for SENCOs and
input from SEND families at all stages.
Let me be clear: there are many more areas where this broken
system is in great need of reform, and we have heard many
fantastic contributions to that effect today, but if we ensured
that more SEND kids were supported within the mainstream
system—if they were able to attend school and were not shut out
of education—we would reduce the pressure on heavily
oversubscribed special schools and would be one step closer to
fixing the SEND system and breaking down the barriers for all
children.
3.53pm
(Farnham and Bordon)
(Con)
In Farnham and Bordon, which I proudly represent, we are
fortunate to have many excellent special educational schools,
such as the Ridgeway school, the Abbey school, More House,
Undershaw school and Stepping Stones in Surrey, and Hollywater in
Hampshire. However, Surrey is a special case that requires urgent
and increased Government action.
Nationally, SEND education affects about 18% of pupils, but in
Surrey the figure rises to a staggering 39%—double the national
average. Hampshire largely aligns with the national figures, yet
both counties face rising demands. Surrey's situation highlights
the need for immediate, targeted intervention from the
Government. Although I remain equally committed to supporting
SEND pupils and parents in Hampshire, Surrey's unique pressures
cannot be ignored. Those families need more support, not only
from their local councils but, crucially, from central
Government.
The Conservative Government made significant strides in
addressing the challenges. For more than a decade, Conservative
Chancellors increased the annual funding to meet the rising
demand. Since 2015, we have seen a 283% increase in EHCP
agreements, which demonstrates the Government's responsiveness to
the growing number of diagnoses. Despite that progress, there is
much more to be done, and the strain on services continues to
grow. I have seen the profound impact that early detection and
diagnosis can have, particularly in SEND, where identifying needs
early is crucial to a child's long-term success. While local
authorities such as Surrey and Hampshire are doing their best,
they need more resources to manage the increased demand without
delays.
I am deeply concerned by the Government's decision to raise VAT
on independent SEND schools. That policy risks pushing many
children who are not funded by local authorities, such as 40% of
the children at More House, back into the state sector, which is
already struggling with larger class sizes and fewer resources. A
20% increase in fees will be devastating for those families,
particularly given the long waiting times for EHCPs. The
Government must rethink their VAT strategy for these schools.
Parents in my constituency have shared with me the immense stress
and frustration that they face, not just from navigating the
system but from the delays that impact their children's education
and wellbeing. These families are already stretched, and the
uncertainty takes an untold toll on both the children and their
families. There is an urgent need for more trained educational
psychologists and special educational needs co-ordinators, and
the Government must step up to provide them.
It is also critical that MPs across all parties stop using SEND
as a political football, as we have seen recently in Surrey. The
blame game helps no one. It only serves to confuse and frustrate
parents further. We must work together to provide clear, accurate
information and focus on delivering the support that families in
Surrey and Hampshire so desperately need. We need action now.
3.56pm
(Spen Valley) (Lab)
I congratulate the hon. Member for Leeds East () on securing this important
debate.
Support for children with special educational needs and
disabilities is an issue that has been raised with me
consistently since my election three years ago. In Batley and
Spen and now in my new Spen Valley constituency, I have had
countless conversations and emails, held roundtables and had
meetings with families, headteachers, teachers and teaching
assistants, councillors and charities about the anger,
frustration and, in many cases, deep trauma they have experienced
trying to navigate the broken system that is SEND.
All any of them want to do is get our children and young people
the help and support they need and deserve, because, as our new
Secretary of State for Education has said, every child should
have the support they need and deserve. Instead, we have amazing
children and young people being prevented from being the very
best that they can be, not enjoying their education, struggling
in school and falling behind, which often has a deeply
detrimental impact on their mental health and wellbeing.
It is not just the children themselves. I have had parents in
tears in my office feeling like they have failed, as they have
not been able to get an EHCP for their child. They have given up
work so that they can support their child, meaning their own
sense of identity and self-worth has suffered, and they feel
guilty that they are not contributing to society and the economy.
I have had headteachers and staff in schools feeling that it is
their fault that they cannot ensure that every child in their
care gets the education they deserve. The reality is that they
are so desperately under-resourced and the system is so broken
that they simply cannot do their jobs in the way that they
want.
It is not just schools; as a former college lecturer, I know that
there are challenges there too. Colleges are often a lifeline for
students with SEND, but, as the association of college lecturers
says, there are real challenges in the way that the SEND system
fits together through funding and student transitions.
This is just not right. Like with so many other issues, this new
Government are having to pick up the pieces of a broken system
that is the result of years of schools and local councils being
chronically underfunded and under-resourced. The previous
Government did not give our education system the care and
attention it needed. Ministers were just not listening to the
sector and not providing the resources and funding that it so
desperately needed.
I have been supporting parents and schools over the last three
years. Laura Riach, a mum of two, recently got in touch. Her
children are both academically bright, but cannot cope with
sensory overload and cannot be in a mainstream school setting
that is noisy and bright. The parents are getting very little
support to home-educate the children and the situation got so
severe that one of the children tried to commit suicide. After
battling with the SEND system, they are getting only six hours'
support per child per week, when they should be getting 25
hours.
Many parents have contacted me about this issue. Children are
losing vital education and the stories show just how broken the
system is. I am very pleased that the new Government have already
started to give SEND the care, compassion and understanding that
is needed to address the crisis.
Several hon. Members rose—
Mr (in the Chair)
I will have to move on to the Front-Bench speeches now. I am
sorry to disappoint so many people, although it was pretty
inevitable. For the information of new Members, I did not call
anyone who had not applied to speak in advance, and I tried to
take account of the time that they applied when deciding the
order in which I called people. That is the only way we can do
it, really.
We move on now to the Front-Bench spokespeople, who will have 10
minutes each. If you could leave a little time at the end for the
mover of the motion to respond, that would be helpful. I call the
Liberal Democrat spokesperson, .
3.59pm
(Twickenham) (LD)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. I
congratulate the hon. Member for Leeds East () and pay tribute to him for
securing this incredibly important debate. The fact that it is
such a packed Chamber—standing room only—is testament to both the
passion with which he set out his case and the stories that we
have heard. We have so many new Members, but those of us who have
served one, two, three or more terms know that inboxes and
postbags are bulging with stories and heartbreaking cases across
the country. In the time available, and given the number who wish
to speak, I will not do the customary paying of tribute to the
various speeches, but I may refer to various contributions as I
go. I would particularly like to recognise those new Members who
were formerly teachers. It is so good to have more teachers in
the House and it is important that we hear their voice. I thank
the hon. Member for Plymouth Moor View () for paying particular tribute
to the hard work of staff up and down the country who have to
battle in this system alongside parents and pupils.
As we have heard, too many vulnerable children who should be
receiving crucial support to learn, play and thrive are being let
down by a system that is broken. According to the latest
Government data, more than 1.6 million children in England have a
special educational need—that is almost one in five of our
pupils. We have heard of the huge growth in the level of demand
in the past few years, with the number of pupils with an
education, health and care plan growing by almost 12% in the past
year alone. More than half a million children are now on EHCPs.
Despite the best efforts and dedication of everyone involved in
the sector, including teachers, parents and charities, it is
clear that services are struggling to keep up with demand. As a
result, too many children with SEND are being left behind.
The new Government have an immense challenge on their hands and,
for all their rhetoric, education was not a priority for the
previous Conservative Government once they were left to their own
devices from 2015 onwards. I have no doubt that the shadow
Minister today will point to a plethora of announcements on SEND
and promises to build special schools in response to the
overwhelming and growing need. Actions sadly never met the
rhetoric. The evidence is crystal clear, as has been backed up by
the stories we have heard from across the House today: we know
that parents and children are stuck in an adversarial system,
fighting, and waiting many months—sometimes even years— to get
the support to which their children are entitled. The previous
Government's own SEND review in 2022 stated that the system
was
“failing to deliver for children, young people and their
families.”
As we have heard, the former Education Secretary, , even described it as
“lose, lose, lose”.
We also know that headteachers are at their wits' end, with
teachers and teaching assistants being driven out of the
classroom because of the strain on them. Last year, on a visit to
Harrogate, my hon. Friend the Member for Harrogate and
Knaresborough () and I met the SENCO for
Coppice Valley primary school, who was leaving because he felt he
could not meet the needs of his pupils and provide the support
that they deserved. In my own constituency, I have heard about
serious safeguarding incidents in schools involving children with
SEND who are not getting the support that they desperately need
and deserve. It is unfair not only on those particular children,
but on the whole class, and it is unfair on the teaching staff
who are doing their very best to provide a good education for
all.
With school budgets so stretched, I know that many schools are
struggling to offer the inclusive education they want to. Many
are laying off teaching assistants to deliver the cost savings
they need, and it is often those teaching assistants who are
providing the support for a child with special educational needs
to remain in a mainstream classroom. At the same time, local
authorities cannot possibly plug the funding gaps from their own
budgets, given the parlous state of council finances.
(Battersea) (Lab)
I commend the hon. Lady on the speech she is giving, and she
rightly points out the challenges around the laying-off of
teaching assistants. Does she agree that in all the reforms that
the Government need to look at, we really must not go back to a
special schools approach but should always focus on having an
inclusive education system with the right support for those
children to learn alongside their peers?
I thank the hon. Member for her intervention and I agree that,
where possible, we need to be as inclusive as possible. Equally,
there are children whose needs cannot be met in a mainstream
setting and we need to have special provision for them—I will
touch on that in a moment.
The funding for special needs has fallen so far short of what is
needed that local authorities across the country now have a
cumulative high needs deficit of approximately £3.15 billion.
Many local authorities' financial viability is being put at risk
by these growing deficits. Although the safety valve programme
that my hon. Friend the Member for Thornbury and Yate () mentioned, of which my own
borough of Richmond upon Thames was an early member, has provided
some relief, it is a sticking-plaster solution, kicking the can
down the road. Once the agreements run out, those local
authorities are projected to start racking up big deficits
again.
As well as the cost of providing the support to which children
are legally and morally entitled, councils are also seeing their
SEND transport bills skyrocket. As my hon. Friend the Member for
Harpenden and Berkhamsted () pointed out in the case
from her constituency, we know that the number of children having
to make long journeys has increased by almost a quarter over the
past five years. Vulnerable children are having to travel ever
further distances because specialist provision is not available
locally for many.
Two thirds of all special schools are full or over capacity. The
last Government was incredibly slow in building the special
schools that they promised, and they turned down many
applications from councils to build and open their own SEND
schools to make that provision available. Councils face a double
whammy: not only are they paying transportation costs, but they
are having to buy in private provision.
Many independent SEND schools are brilliant not-for-profit
charities, but there is also obscene profiteering from some
special schools run by private equity firms, which are bleeding
councils up and down the country dry. I hope the Labour
Government will look at that because my calls to the Conservative
Government fell on deaf ears.
I want to pick up a point made by the right hon. Member for
Tatton () about the many families whose
children are not eligible for EHCPs or who cannot face the
gauntlet of trying to secure one. They turn to mainstream, small
independent schools to better support their child because larger
mainstream schools cannot support that need, but those families
will be penalised by the new Government's plan to slap VAT on
independent school fees from January. Those who will not be able
to afford the additional cost will turn to the state sector,
putting more pressure on, as we have heard, a system in
crisis.
Furthermore, the proposal to have a VAT exemption for those with
EHCPs will incentivise even more parents to apply through the
system. I have heard from a constituent just this week who will
probably have to do that, which will put yet more pressure on a
system that cannot cope with more. I look forward to hearing what
the Minister has to say about the 100,000 children who have SEND
and are in the independent sector.
All of us recognise that SEND provision is an enormous challenge
that will not be resolved overnight despite what the Secretary of
State hopes to be able to do. I stand ready to support her in any
way I can to make sure that we tackle the issue. The recent
Liberal Democrat manifesto set out several ideas that I hope the
Minister will look at.
First we propose that a new national body be established for SEND
that would be responsible for funding the support of children
with very high needs. The national body for SEND would pay for
any costs above £25,000 for children with high needs. It would
reduce risk for local authorities and help to tackle the postcode
lottery that we have heard about.
(Cheltenham) (LD)
Will my hon. Friend give way on that point?
I am not sure I have the time; I am so sorry. The national body
for SEND would also act as a champion for every child with
special needs or disabilities and promote widespread inclusive
practice. Additionally, Liberal Democrats would like to see
councils funded to reduce the amount that schools pay towards the
cost of a child's education, health and care plan. The current
£6,000 threshold acts as a disincentive in the system, which can
hinder schools from identifying and establishing a need before it
impacts the child's schooling. We cannot wait for things to go
wrong before we fix them.
As the hon. Member for Gosport (Dame ) said, early intervention
is key. That is why, as we have heard from many Labour Members,
boosting training for teachers and for early years practitioners,
so that we can identify needs early and support early, is so
crucial.
Behind every statistic and case study we have heard about today,
there is a child who is struggling, with parents and carers who
are under stress. We have a duty to act. Liberal Democrats
believe that every child, no matter their needs and background,
deserves the opportunity to thrive. I look forward to hearing the
Minister's comments and to working with the Education Secretary
to fix our broken SEND system. The children deserve it.
4.09pm
(North West Norfolk) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Betts. I
congratulate the hon. Member for Leeds East () on securing this popular
debate. I am pleased to have the opportunity to respond on behalf
of the Opposition. The fact that this is the third debate on the
same subject in this Chamber this week—the Minister must have a
season ticket—underlines the amount of casework that we all have
to deal with, as I did in the last Parliament, to help parents
and children get the support that they need. That is exactly what
this debate is about.
We all want an education system that helps children and young
people with SEND to fulfil their potential and live fulfilling
lives. I pay tribute to all those working in schools, including
my sister who is a SENCO in a Norfolk school, to support those
children. Everyone has spoken about demand and the challenges
that that is causing, and the pressure on funding. The number of
EHCPs and statements of SEN have more than doubled since 2015. In
my county of Norfolk there has been a 33% increase in the last
five years alone, and my hon. Friend the Member for Farnham and
Bordon () referred to the real
pressures in Surrey.
In recognition of the growing demand, the last Conservative
Government increased the high needs budget to £10.5 billion this
year, which is 60% higher than in 2020. To help increase
much-needed capacity, £2.6 billion was invested to fund new
places and to improve existing provision. Nonetheless, as
everyone has heard today, the level of demand continues to grow.
It was the need for more consistent support and outcomes that led
to the SEND and alternative provision improvement plan published
last year. The review came after a long period of discussion with
the sector—with parents and schools—to understand what was
needed, and it aimed to ensure that every child gets the right
support in the right place at the right time. At its core was an
attempt to deal with the feeling that parents have to battle a
system, which too many of them have, as every MP present knows.
The hon. Member for Portsmouth North () talked about the challenge
of getting EHCPs done in time and had a suggestion about how to
address that.
(Runcorn and Helsby)
(Lab)
Under the previous Government, in 2023, 98% of appeals to
tribunal were upheld. Does that not demonstrate the utter failure
that, under the watch of the previous Government, has created
this broken SEND system?
The hon. Gentleman makes his point. It underlines the need for
reform of the system, which is precisely why mediation was part
of the proposals that we brought forward.
The reforms were based around national standards so that there
was a consistent approach. The first area we were going to bring
forward was developing standards for speech and language, which
is so important, and improving the timeliness of the EHCP process
by introducing a standardised approach. As part of our focus on
SEND, the last Government opened 15 new free schools, approved a
further 40 and invested in training—which again is so
important—for over 5,000 early years SEND practitioners. I know
that the Minister is committed to delivering better outcomes, so
can she confirm whether the Government have committed to
implementing the national standards and the approach that we put
forward in those reforms?
Funding in the SEND sector remains a significant challenge,
increasing pressure on councils; the recent County Councils
Network and Local Government Association report set that out
clearly. As other hon. Members have referred to, in government we
set out the safety value and delivering better value programmes,
which 90 local authorities are involved in. Additionally, the
statutory override was introduced to prevent SEND-related
deficits from overwhelming council budgets. However, that
override is set to expire in March 2026, and without clear
direction, local authorities face the prospect of making
significant cuts. Can the Minister clarify the Government's
intentions, and whether the statutory override will be extended
to give councils the flexibility to work with schools and
families to make the necessary changes? Local authorities are
also seeing huge pressures from home-to-school transport costs.
In Norfolk alone that is £60 million, with more than 80%
allocated to SEND pupils. That is money spent on journeys rather
than delivering better education, so improving mainstream
education and specialist provision closer to where children live
is vital.
One of the first of over 40 visits that I undertook in my first
term as an MP in my constituency was to Greenpark academy, where
the head raised the issue of speech and language therapy and
access to therapists, which has been referred to. The
Conservative Government made progress in improving access,
recognising the long-term benefits of early intervention, but
there is still much more to do, which I concede readily. I
welcome the Government announcement in July that they will
continue the Nuffield early language intervention programme this
school year, and I hope that it will continue beyond that.
However, there is still considerable disparity of access, so what
steps will the Government take to address that, so that every
child with speech and language needs gets the support that they
deserve?
(Bridlington and The
Wolds) (Con)
Does my hon. Friend agree that it is a travesty that a child with
SEND in the London borough of Camden receives more than three
times the funding of a child with SEND in my constituency? Every
child should have access to the same support, funding and
opportunity.
Absolutely. My hon. Friend makes the point that our right hon.
Friend the Member for Goole and Pocklington (Sir ) made earlier, as well as in a
debate in the previous Parliament. I am sure the Minister will
touch on that in her response.
The LGA and the CCN have assessed that the safety valve is worth
about £3 billion. Had the Conservative party stayed in power,
what would their solution have been to fill that black hole?
The hon. Gentleman will be aware from his presence in the Chamber
that we did not win the election, so it is for the Government to
come forward with what they will do. They are now in power and
must take decisions and take responsibility—that is the
difference between Opposition and Government.
Finally, I must highlight the impact of the Labour Government's
plans to impose VAT on independent schools from January and what
that will mean for SEND provision. More than 100,000 children and
young people without an EHCP are educated and receive specialist
support in independent schools. My right hon. Friend the Member
for Tatton () made the point well. She
highlighted the fact that putting VAT on their fees will disrupt
education for thousands of those pupils and place further strain
on SEND provision in the state sector. By bringing the changes in
partway through the academic year, Labour's plans seem designed
to cause maximum disruption to those children's learning and to
the state school system. Are the Minister and the Government
listening to schools and parents, and will they act to ensure
that those vulnerable children do not bear the brunt of that
policy?
(St Helens North) (Lab)
The hon. Gentleman is talking about disruption to children and
their development. Under the previous Government, in the past 10
years, investment in early intervention such as children's
centres fell by about 44%. What effect did he think that had on
young children?
We need to look at such things in the round. We put record
amounts into childcare and we have just seen the latest roll-out
of our childcare plans, which I think the Government now support,
albeit a little sotto voce.
To conclude and to leave the Minister time to respond, there is
unity across this Chamber—I hope—about the desire to ensure that
the SEND system provides the support and outcomes that children
and young people deserve. To help to achieve that, the last
Government set out a path of comprehensive reform. It now falls
to the new Government to continue to drive improvements, to
tackle the challenges set out in this debate by Members from all
parties and to deliver the very best for children and their
families.
4.18pm
The Minister for School Standards ()
It is an honour to serve under you as Chair, Mr Betts.
I congratulate the hon. Member for Leeds East () on securing a debate on
this incredibly important subject. The fact that it is so well
attended shows how important it is. I pay tribute to all hon.
Members who have managed to make their contributions today,
ensuring that their constituents' voices are heard. I would like
to be able to respond to all the individual points, but the sheer
volume of speakers will make that challenging. I also pay tribute
to those present who have prepared speeches but have not been
able to deliver them. I know their constituents want their voices
to be heard in this debate as well, and I pay tribute to the
effort that Members put in to attend and to show such a level of
support.
(Derby North) (Lab)
Will the Minister give way?
I will give way in a moment.
The strength of feeling on this issue is clear. Most of all, I
reassure the Chamber that this Government are absolutely
committed to tackling it. It is key to breaking down the barriers
to opportunity to give every child the best start in life, and
that includes all those with special educational needs and
disabilities, to give them the right start in life to have a
successful education and to lead happy, healthy and productive
lives.
I warn the Chamber that I will not be able to take many
interventions, but I will take one from my hon. Friend the Member
for Derby North (), who got in so
fast.
My constituent, Hayley, wrote on my social media,
“After years of being unheard or ignored, I feel a small sense of
relief that this is now being taken to parliament and discussed,
even though I understand there is a long way to go”.
I thank the Minister for her speech. Can I share with her,
another time, the testimonies of the many constituents who have
contacted me ahead of this debate?
I thank my hon. Friend for that intervention. I think she speaks
for many here today, and many of those watching this debate as
well. We are listening; we are committed; we want to work across
the sector and with everyone here in order to turn this around.
More than 1.6 million children and young people in England have
special educational needs, and we know that, for far too long,
too many families have been let down by a system that is not
working. As mentioned already, the former Secretary of State for
Education described the system as “lose, lose, lose”, and I know
there is agreement in this room that that is very much the
case.
(Reading Central) (Lab)
I thank my hon. Friend for giving way; she is being very generous
with her time. Would she agree that a part of the serious
problems in many of our local areas was the delay in building new
SEND provision under the previous Government? That certainly had
a serious effect in Berkshire, and there are huge pressures on
families and vulnerable children in my area. I just wanted to
relay that point to her again.
I appreciate my hon. Friend's concern, and this Government are
absolutely committed to strengthening children's entitlement to
excellent provision that meets their needs and that is readily
available, locally wherever possible. That is a key focus of any
changes that we wish to see made in this area.
(West Lancashire) (Lab)
Will the Minister give way?
I will—last one!
I thank the Minister for giving way. This is an issue that has
not been raised enough today: the previous Government's SEND and
alternative provision improvement plan, published just last year,
contained no specific proposals for rural communities such as
mine. Can the Minister confirm that the Labour Government will
consider the specific needs, particularly around access, for SEND
pupils in rural areas?
I appreciate the issue my hon. Friend is raising, and I will come
on to that, because I appreciate that there have been a lot of
comments from Members today on the national funding formula and
how it works. I would like to make some progress, so if hon.
Members will allow me, there are a number of issues that I would
like to respond to, particularly in relation to the hon. Member
for Leeds East, who tabled this debate.
Despite the fact that high needs funding for children and young
people with complex special educational needs and disabilities is
rising to higher and higher levels, confidence in the system is
low, tribunal rates are increasing and there are increasingly
long waits for support. Far too many children with special
educational needs fall behind their peers. They do not reach the
expected level in fundamental reading, writing and maths skills,
with just one in four pupils achieving expected standards at the
end of primary school. That is a system that is “lose, lose,
lose”, as the former Education Secretary described. Families are
struggling to get their child the support they need and, more
importantly, deserve. So many hon. Members have spoken on behalf
of families that they represent and demonstrated that struggle
today.
After years in which parents have been frustrated by reform
programmes being delayed and by promises not being delivered,
this Labour Government want to be honest with families. We are
absolutely committed to improving inclusivity and expertise in
mainstream schools, as well as to ensuring that special schools
can cater to those with the most complex needs. We want to
restore parents' trust that their child will get the support that
they need to flourish.
We know that early identification and intervention is key to
ensuring that the impacts of any special educational need or
disability is minimised, or reduced, for the long term. That is
why we very quickly announced the continuation of funding for the
Nuffield Early Language Intervention—NELI—programme, to make sure
that it can continue for 2024-25. We know that early speech and
language intervention will help these children and young people
to find their voices.
We also know that there are no quick fixes for these deep-rooted
issues. After 14 years, I can scarcely see a system that is so
broken or in such desperate need of reform. That is why we are
absolutely determined to fix it, and we have started work
already. It is a priority for this Department to fix our SEND
system, but we know that we cannot do it alone. We have to work
with the sector and valued partners, and we have to make sure
that our approach is fully planned and delivered together with
parents, schools, councils and expert staff—we know they are
already going above and beyond for our children, but we can do so
much better.
As I have already mentioned, many Members have raised concerns
about the national funding formula, so the Government acted as
quickly as we could to respond to some of the immediate cost
pressures in the SEND system. We know that they are causing
incredible financial difficulties in some local authorities, so
before the parliamentary recess we announced a new core schools
budget grant to provide special and alternative provision schools
with over £140 million of extra funding in this financial year,
to help with the extra costs of the teacher pay award and the
outcome of the negotiations about increased pay for support staff
as well. That money is in addition to the high needs funding
allocation for children and young people with complex special
needs and disabilities.
However, despite those record levels of investment, I know that
families are still fighting the system, because it is not
delivering. The Department for Education's budget for 2025-26 has
not yet been decided, and how much high needs funding is
distributed to local authorities, schools and colleges next year
will depend on the next stage of the Government's spending
review, due to be announced in October.
That means that the high needs allocations have not been
published within the normal timescale, but we are working at pace
to announce next year's funding allocations. We are acutely aware
of the pressures that local authorities face, not only because
they are supporting the increasing needs of young people and
children, but because of the financial pressures that the
Government as a whole face because of the economic climate we
have inherited.
It will not be easy or quick to solve those problems, but we
really want to work on long-term solutions and we want to work
together with others on these important issues. That includes
looking at the national funding formula. We will take time to
consider whether to make changes to it. We will of course
consider the impact on any local authorities and, as my hon.
Friend the Member for West Lancashire () mentioned, on particular
areas that have made representations in relation to the
formula.
(North Cornwall) (LD)
Will the Minister give way?
I really am short of time.
On inspection, we welcome the publication of the Big Listen
response this week. We want to work with Ofsted to consider how
outcomes for children with SEND can better demonstrate inclusion,
and we want every school to be driving to be as inclusive as it
can be, so that mainstream provision is provided for as many
children as possible.
In the interests of fairness, I will give way just one more
time.
I thank the Minister for giving way and for her comments about
reviewing the funding formula. May I take this opportunity to
urge her to finally address the per-pupil funding deficit for
pupils in Cornwall, who receive thousands and thousands of pounds
less per pupil than pupils in the rest of the country? I hope she
agrees that pupils in Cornwall, including in my North Cornwall
constituency, particularly those with special educational needs,
are no less valuable than children in other parts of the
country.
I will say again and again that we are absolutely committed to
ensuring that every child's entitlement to have the best
education possible, in their local area and where they need it,
can be delivered under our system.
Nothing says more about the state of our nation than the
wellbeing of our children. However, one of the great casualties
of the last 14 years has been our children's wellbeing, their
development and their opportunities. Under the last Government,
we saw relative child poverty soar, the rates of children
presenting with mental health conditions skyrocketing, and more
and more children languishing on waiting lists.
It now falls to the Labour Government to rebuild opportunities
for our children. That is why we have bold ambitions and why we
are determined to deliver on them. I thank hon. Members for
bringing this matter forward today and all Members who have
contributed to this debate.
However, most of all I want to acknowledge the hard work being
done by so many people working in education, health and care who
support our children and young people with special educational
needs. We know that work is challenging, but we thank them for
their commitment and their service.
Mr (in the Chair)
I call to respond—very briefly—to
the debate.
4.29pm
Thank you, Mr Betts, for calling me to speak, and I thank all
hon. Members who have taken part in the debate today. Given that
demand to speak has exceeded supply today, I particularly hope
that new Members who had written their speeches in advance, but
were unable to make them in the debate, will consider publishing
them online.
I thank the Minister for her response—her statement of intent.
This debate today can only be the beginning. We need to recognise
that there is a crisis in SEND provision. We need to ensure that
SEND provision is properly financed and funded. We need to ensure
that SEND provision is not seen in a silo and that instead there
is a holistic approach to it. We also need to move forward, so I
hope that we can find more time in the main Chamber to take this
debate forward and tackle this challenge.
Question put and agreed to.
Resolved,
That this House has considered SEND provision.
|
