Regardless of what can be said about the Government’s plans related to the education plans for children with special needs, they cannot be managed in the same, kalaramy as personal independence payments (PIP) reforms. As said with great force during the first year of work of Labour, you need to learn lessons.
The Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson is the main minister who prepares in October white schools, which will offer proposals to replace the special needs system. It has already caused some concern, refusing to deny the change of education, health and care plans (EHCPS), and the main members of the Parliament have focused on the Rights Group and its party.
Honestly speaking, Mrs. Phillipson and her colleagues in the past spoke of changes in EHCP. However, the recent draft Law on Welfare Reform, Fiasco, has increased anxiety and strengthened the confidence of the Leabor support that they can deny the party leadership and block the reform. There was also a oblique work manifesto on this issue.
The fear element, if not paranoid, became involved in the debate, and the task of Mrs. Phillipson was much more difficult due to her colleagues – Rachel Reeves as Chancellor, Liz Kendall as a work and pension secretary, and Prime Minister Sir Keiro Starter’s mistakes.
Mrs. Phillipson is one of the brighter “work attachment” stars, but she will succeed if it appears from the process by improving the improved EHCP mode or its reputation. Trust has been eradicated.
For any party of any party, the provision of special education needs and disability (Send) for children and young people is a particular challenge, and right. This is one of the most vulnerable people and cannot be subject to discriminatory behavior as a matter of both law and morality. As a society, it is an obligation to take care of children and young people with physical and learning disabilities and offer them the best beginning of life, to maximize their independence and life opportunities.
Their parents need and deserve support, and any inability to do so is unwise. Unlike PIP reforms, there must be no sensory that the reform is only treasury and even leads to the need for treasury and savings, although financial reality has not been avoided. As Mrs. Reeves and Mrs. Kendall learned about their price, there are red lines that this generation of work parliamentarians will not be allocated solely for the fiscal rules.
Therefore, Mrs. Phillipson has to win arguments – and as far as possible, carry all the people associated with it, when she conveys and improves it. Therefore, various groups representing the sending children and parents must be closely involved in each phase of policy development.
Given the latest events, this is something she now has well. In any case, what happened to PIP rights has no alternative. The parliamentary Labor Party, as it is now, requires that it be consulted. When it comes time to publish a white book, there should be no unpleasant surprises. If there are any, it will be as condemned as the draft Law on Welfare Reform.
Second, this process cannot be rushed or realized that it will be rushed. The October White Book is reasonable in October, but it should not be considered a good policy. If the shipping sections are not ready to be announced then they should be delayed. Indeed, given the sensitivity and complexity, there is a strong case where Send policy is a comprehensive study and white paper. Again, the lesson of the latest events is that late politics is better than bad politics.
It is also really necessary to better understand – completely distinguished from the involvement of special schools or children in the general school system, which will certainly differ in individual cases. It is also wrong as it seems now that differences in different provisions of local authorities can be so vivid – postcode lottery.
Third, there must be some knowledge of financial trends: why they are going and how they develop. This is not all experts understand well. Many more children are granted legislative rights under EHCPS, but the sudden increase in about 70 percent of the increase in less than a decade is less transparent. The following year, annual support for children with learning difficulties or disabilities is £ 12 billion.
The financial system also needs to be changed. Currently, the costs of sending statutory sending are primarily assisted by the school management and the local government, and they tend to squeeze other important, albeit less vital priorities. According to the Institute of Fiscal Research, local councils until 2027 Local councils will help by 2027. Cumulative deficit – £ 8 billion. In other words, more councils will be a bust, which does not help anyone. It would be much satisfactory if there was a national shipping financing system based on consistent criteria.
Finally, and again, based on an important lesson-send and EHCP system should be based on a cross-party consensus. This is, of course, unlikely, but for obvious reasons it would help children and parents, as well as schools and local authorities to plan in advance and avoid stigmatization if those with special needs “armed” for political advantage. It may not only be Mrs. Phillipson’s abilities, but she really needs to know that she and her government cannot afford another failure.
This time, unlike Mrs. Kendall, she can remind Sir Keir and Mrs. Reeves about certain political realities.