.png)
4 hours ago
2
The crisis over special educational needs and disabilities in England is not just a question of cash. Children and parents spend months and years battling for support to which the law entitles them, schools lack the funding to meet needs, and specialist provision is inadequate. An adversarial system shunts families towards tribunals that councils almost invariably lose.
Tory reforms created obligations for local authorities but did not adequately fund them – allowing ministers to duck responsibility. The result has been financial chaos, with the overall overspend on special educational needs and disabilities (Send) predicted to reach £6.6bn by next March, and keep rising. Taking responsibility for funding away from councils and handing it to the Department for Education is the right move. But the most important questions about Send go beyond accounting. A white paper on reform was postponed in October. Bridget Phillipson, the education secretary, told MPs that she would consult further before deciding on the future of education, health and care plans, which set out entitlements for individual children, and the tribunals where parents can challenge council decisions.
After the government’s U-turn on disability benefit cuts, this pause looked like panic. If the extra time and the DfE’s beefed-up role lead to a stronger policy, it will have been worth it. But trust is lacking among campaigners who believe, with some justification, that cost-cutting is the underlying purpose. Unevidenced claims that lower spending will be a “side-effect” of any changes do not help. Labour’s stated aim, reiterated by Rachel Reeves, is a tilt towards the inclusion of children with additional needs in mainstream schools, away from separate provision. Rightly, ministers are determined to avoid a repeat of what happened in children’s social care, where a hollowing-out of public sector capacity created a space captured by private businesses, some funded by private equity. This is sound social democratic logic, and Ms Phillipson deserves credit for progress in children’s social care since last year’s election.
Private investors should not be setting prices and making money from education budgets. But the breadth of experiences and needs encompassed by the category of Send is enormous, ranging from physical disabilities to behavioural problems and the growing number of children with an autism diagnosis. Not all needs will be met in mainstream settings. Labour’s white paper needs to grasp this complexity – and be honest about the time needed to embed effective changes. Parents and teachers need to be confident that the clock is not being wound back to a time when provision was broad-brush and basic, and often wholly inadequate.
The Conservatives take credit where school standards have risen, but duck responsibility for changes that did not suit all pupils and made some schools and classrooms less inclusive. Ministers are justifiably angry about an inheritance that includes Boris Johnson’s refusal to fund a pandemic recovery package recommended by experts. But if they are serious about rebuilding a system that is resilient, they will need support beyond their own benches.
Lifting children out of poverty should ease some pressures on schools. But that will take time. For now, Ms Phillipson faces a battle with the Treasury – and must win it. If she does not want to find herself fighting schools and families too, she must show that she understands there are no quick fixes – and no cheap ones. Children who face greater challenges than their peers have an equal right to an education.
