Reform councils to cut SEN spending

But actually this isn't proving to be the case.

Despite the vast increases in spending on SEN over the last 10-15 years, more young people than ever aren't working or aren't managing full time work.

So actually despite the increased support, they aren't going on to be more productive, for some reason.

This is right out of Trump's playbook, isn't he doing similar over in America. God they're both so obnoxious.

What so many people forget is that if young people are correctly supported in school to meet their own potential then they are much more likely to become “productive” members of society in adulthood.

Just look at the current mess with prisions and the statistics on how many people in prision had undiagnosed needs at school and as such slipped through the net.

Proper support in place is in everyone’s best interest in the long run!

The H bit of an EHCP is health. Section G I think?

Heath care provision which educates or trains, as therapies, which the pp mentioned, mostly do, is deemed special educational provision and thus belongs in F rather than G.

This is reform we’re talking about here. Given their contempt for minority groups I wouldn’t be at all surprised if they cut SEN funding. It’s what people with their ideology do.

Farage has already said he wants to sack all DEI workers because councils are spending too much on equality and diversity, and banning WFH. This will hugely affect disabled workers but no one gives a shit because they don’t think things through. That’s one way in which they are showing utter contempt for people with disabilities and other minority groups. Cutting SEN funding will just be the another.

"At present, EHCPs can trigger extremely high public spending—sometimes upwards of £60,000 per year per child—without a consistent standard of accountability or measurable outcomes."

Councils providing adequate provision in the state sector would reduce the number of expensive placements.

We’ll have to agree to disagree.

The core framework for schooling should always be free, but if you want/need add-ons or extras, you should be willing to pay towards that provision.

Perhaps a portion of that could come out of DLA/PIP if awarded?

Whatever the antecedents, it’s hardly a ringing endorsement to say they will be any good at running a council though, is it? Arguably, no party is, but to suggest they might do a decent job and care about people’s needs knowing their rhetoric is laughable. They’re a one policy party and they don’t give a shit for anything else. They’ll have their snouts in the trough just like when Farage was an MEP for very little work and then bog off, blaming central government.

They care for nobody, else they wouldn’t even suggest that we don’t need ergonomic chairs to help disabled employees, or we don’t need equality. Scrapping these things will make things worse in the long run. WFH, for instance, saves money in utility bills for companies, and reasonable adjustments prevent time off sick. I suppose if they ever get to remove our rights if they get elected into government, none of that will matter, I guess.

No - parents looking after their children.

Who else’s responsibility is it to look after your own children?

No - parents looking after their children.

Who else’s responsibility is it to look after your own children?

Yes.

Unpaid carers in the UK provide care valued at an estimated £184.3 billion annually.

"I have to be honest, I don’t see parents caring for their own DC as ‘saving the state £££’ even though of course they should receive support to do so."

Disabled child looked after by the state. £4000 a week.

Disabled child looked after by parents . CA and DLA.

Ours has definitely invested more in SEN provision, it's has doubled the number of special school places through a combination of building new special schools and increasing capacity in current ones. However, all this was prior to the change of government, and Labour has dramatically reduced the amount of money coming into education. So councils are now having to make difficult decisions - where does the money come from to fund this? From children's social care? Mainstream schools? Adult learning disabilities?
They tried increasing rates and council tax on businesses, and 2 in our area closed down as a result, 2 which were providing a non profit social support for vulnerable children. So now the council have to pay for this support themselves, plus aren't getting the rates.
I don't know how we square this circle of ever increasing demand with no more money available. Our team is so overstretched and getting it from both ends - managers hounding us to cut budgets and families asking for more, many are at breaking point and considering moving into private practice - our ex colleagues who have are happier, less stressed, earn more.

Someone upthread mentioned that reform insist that SEN didn't exist when they were young.
I am probably of reform supports age and SEN people certainly did exist however they were either placed in hospitals for what was known as "mentally handicapped" and left there for life or put in the remedial classes at school where the children would be doing handicrafts and not expected to achieve anything. Do reform want us to go back to those days

The H bit of an EHCP is health. Section G I think? So I can't see why mum son should pay for healthcare because it's in a plan..

The country has got itself is a mess where inadequete state provision has led to expensive private provision, and whilst I am sure the expensive private provision has better outcomes than no provision, I do actually think there are private companies holding the tax payer over a barrel and extorting LAs. My understanding is some LAs have outsourced thier entire children's home provision to companies with shareholders.

I don't know how yo rectify this. I feel it would be big burst of investment to increase state provision, whilst ensuring those currently in private provision don't get dragged out.

I do have personal experience of a private sen school charging the LA but not really delivering and it was in rdfibly hard to sort.

The key difference is that medical care in the UK is already means-blind and centrally funded through the NHS, which is structured specifically to provide universal healthcare without charging at the point of need. It’s a foundational principle of our health system—and for good reason.

EHCPs, however, sit within local authority education budgets, not the NHS. They’re funded from a limited pot of money that was never designed to absorb the rising costs we’re now seeing—particularly when some EHCP placements cost more than private school fees. Unlike healthcare, where services are clinically assessed and standardised, EHCPs can vary widely based on parental advocacy, legal pressure, or school capacity—not just need.

This makes the system more vulnerable to inequality, overextension, and ultimately collapse.

So it’s not about picking on SEN families—it’s about recognising that this specific part of the welfare system is financially unsustainable and lacks the safeguards that prevent overuse in healthcare. Asking those who can afford to contribute toward EHCP-related costs—especially for non-essential extras—is about creating resilience in the system, not penalising disability.

If the NHS were funded like the EHCP system is now, we’d likely be having the same conversation about means-testing for certain services. The problem is structural—and that’s why education funding needs its own honest, pragmatic solution.

The key difference is that medical care in the UK is already means-blind and centrally funded through the NHS, which is structured specifically to provide universal healthcare without charging at the point of need. It’s a foundational principle of our health system—and for good reason.

EHCPs, however, sit within local authority education budgets, not the NHS. They’re funded from a limited pot of money that was never designed to absorb the rising costs we’re now seeing—particularly when some EHCP placements cost more than private school fees. Unlike healthcare, where services are clinically assessed and standardised, EHCPs can vary widely based on parental advocacy, legal pressure, or school capacity—not just need.

This makes the system more vulnerable to inequality, overextension, and ultimately collapse.

So it’s not about picking on SEN families—it’s about recognising that this specific part of the welfare system is financially unsustainable and lacks the safeguards that prevent overuse in healthcare. Asking those who can afford to contribute toward EHCP-related costs—especially for non-essential extras—is about creating resilience in the system, not penalising disability.

If the NHS were funded like the EHCP system is now, we’d likely be having the same conversation about means-testing for certain services. The problem is structural—and that’s why education funding needs its own honest, pragmatic solution.