Yes, lots of glaring omissions. I am particularly concerned that the revised code of practice , which will provide most of the nuts and bolts of this, is not proposed to be scrutinised and debated in parliament.
I am drafting my response now using all the above documents as help and adding my won experience in which I think is important to do as it gives a depth to the argument that would otherwise not be there.
I met Jane McConnell yesterday on a training course. She was a bit guarded about what they were going to say about the draft as she was still writing it. I got the impression that she thought that there were glaring omissions in it ( like the right to apply for assessment). She had definitely seen the previous discussion about SOSSEN's response and commented on it. TBH I am struggling a little as all these press releases seem very general. Do you think that they have been more specific in their actual responses to the committee.
Still writing my response! It is absolutely essential that the draft revised Code of Practice is made available for public scrutiny and debate in parliament, rather than just "rubber stamped" please see this link for reasons: www.zen123082.zen.co.uk/Articles/CodeofMalpractice.htm
From 2000 - things don't change for disabled children!
The current draft Bill removes the requirement to specify and quantify provision, without which, an EHC Plan will not be worth the paper its written on!
I intend to copy my MP in on my response (when I finally finish it)