Kemi badenoch now against autistic children

[Hunnymonster1]

What is wrong with her? Just read that the children commision is saying average wait like to get diagnosed as autistic is 4 years.
So kemi banging on about how parents are pushing gor diagnosis because they see how much extra money etc autistic children get at school is wrong.
The fact is I woukd think judging by lbc many kids are not getting the support that they need.
So js this about her saying the conservatives need to save tax by not helping people or children with autism and mental health issues.
Bare in mind she said similar about maternity pay last week makes me think she's like Liz truss wants to cut alot of stuff
How the hell can anyone support this?
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/kemi-badenoch-autism-tory-leadership-buckland-b2628845.html

Have you heard of the send safety valve scheme? You may want to read about it of you haven't. This is being used now, around 40 LA'S are signed up. This isn't scaremongering this is what is happening now.

https://www.ipsea.org.uk/blog/why-were-calling-for-an-end-to-the-safety-valve-intervention-programme

https://contact.org.uk/about-contact/news-and-views/safety-valve-agreements-how-they-impact-disabled-children-and-their-families/

https://www.specialneedsjungle.com/uncovering-truth-send-safety-valve-agreement-cut-childrens-send-provision/

Where have labour said safety valve is part of their SEND plan for the future?

It's a DoE scheme already in use, where have Labour said they'll stop it? They haven't that I've seen.

This is also Labour who has put vat on inde schools which will also impact on send as many families would rather (and can just about afford to) pay school fees than go through mainstream and fight for provision. These are usually (not all) nd kids.

Yes, I can see the Conservatives'Safety Valve Scheme' will be a big scandal - it deserves to be much more wildly known.

And it's an excellent distraction from Badenoch's pamphlet.

This thread is helpful (4 is quite important) -

1. The DfE's Safety Valve project is alarming.

As shown last night, it demands savage cuts across a range of SEND services, especially EHCPs, and a major movement of SEND kids from special to mainstream schools. The aim is reduction of costs. The effect is reduction of services.

1. The risks associated with Safety Valve are colossal.

BCP officers identified issues with deliverability, cost, reputation, and above all services. It would place any participating council at enhanced legal risk.

1. Why is DfE pushing LAs to join Safety Valve?

The override on SEND deficits ends in 2026. After that, most LAs expect to declare insolvency. Last night BCP stated a S114 notice would be needed "by late 2024" if the override isn't extended. An extension is needed before the GE.

1. BCP confirmed no Equality Impact Assessment had been made for Safety Valve.

It has a Public Sector Equality Duty to assess any proposed policy. Yet this will be done "when an agreement is reached": only after the contract is signed. Few people will see the proposal beforehand.

x.com/adamhighcliffe/status/1743004543183450420?s=46&t=Uw4lJNwxFZFnX0Xs3doHYg

The 🧵 continues.

Strongly recommend those with twitter read it in full.

I'll add more when I get time.

Oh come on, all the kids whose parents can’t afford private are not SEND.A tiny percentage of the population can afford private. Most will stay, a few will leave and they are not all going to be SENd or anywhere near the level of send that requires money in the state sector.

Re safety valve parents can appeal and are in many cases successful. Will be interesting to see how much money is saved from sv if more parents use the appeal system.

I haven't wrote all kids are send but many are, one of them whose child is nd is trying to challenge legally. Yes these kids will require funding as usually the parents pull them from mainstream because they can't cope.

Yes parents can appeal (for now but with the proposed changes who knows) but many do not as many don't understand the system, can't cope, are too exhausted..... the sv system was put in to save cash, no other reason. Oh and many of the sv councils are Labour and we're Labour at the time of agreeing to it.

Labour will have to do something about send costs.

"Around 111,000 special educational needs and disabled (SEND) pupils are in private schools, but fewer than 8,000 have an EHCP."

https://news.sky.com/story/labour-government-faces-legal-challenge-over-addition-of-vat-to-private-school-fees-13227805

Little bit more on the Safety Valve procedure -

1. Additional funds will be needed to support the proposals.

This includes a plan to transfer 11% of schools funding into the high needs budget, & raid schools' reserves. This risks pushing many schools into insolvency overnight. Anecdotally, I hear school leaders are furious.

1. Yet there's no plan to fully equip mainstream schools with the resources they need to accommodate hundreds of new SEND students.

When challenged, an officer stated: "the work is developing".

x.com/adamhighcliffe/status/1743004553191047555?s=46&t=Uw4lJNwxFZFnX0Xs3doHYg

Will be back in a bit.

But parents have ultimate responsibility for their children and it is understandable that parents will fight back when their child is denied or who can't access an education. If other parents are unable to do that, for whatever reason, then they should be supported but to pitch one group of parents who can fight against those who can't is problematic. In my experience, it was this viewpoint that was hurled against me and which in the end caused serious harm to my son and daughter.

@Flowers4me I've faught for my son too but I recognise that the system is unfair and it's children that are impacted.

Parents do have ultimate responsibility I agree but part of the reason every disabled child is legally a child in need is because of the impact that disability has on parents.

This isn't putting parents against each other, it's just recognition that the 2014 send reforms didn't have the result that was intended with some families fairing better than others.

To be fair this is the safety valve programme and the send improvement t plan 2023.

We don't know if they will carry on with thse, but they also haven't said they will stop doing them.

I live in a safety valve area. a result the council is trying to move away from sending children in taxis to private schools far from home. The level of send in mainstream has increased hugely and this isn't working. But also the council has finally looked into setting up many more small local units attached to schools starting with younger children. I actually like that. It's much better close to home for logistics and friendships. the reality is that although my son has a right to am education and there were no other options than his far away school, the cost of his transport could fund another sen child if they were both in town hub. My town has no special schools at all. That's nuts. I'm pushing to get a unit locally.

If you look at the sv agreements that councils have made, many go into 2028.

I agree, the 2014 reforms were absolutely rubbish; all that money spent and look where we are. But I do think there is a lot of resentment towards those who are perceived to be fighting for their kids. I think rather than being critical towards those who can effectively fight, we should be supporting those who can't to achieve similar outcomes though what those outcomes are, I don't know. In my experience, there was no school or provision to fight for, for my autistic son and daughter. The infrastructure is lacking, no wonder so many are forced into home educating.

I really don't agree that the 2014 reforms were rubbish. The law as it stands is actually pretty good, and SEND law is, I understand, fairly unique in imposing clearly defined duties when you compare it with, say, the law on care. I would be really sorry to give any government the excuse to start again, as we would almost certainly end up worse off.

The problem with the current system lies with (1) lack of accountability and especially with (2) lack of funding. Local authorities know they can't afford to comply with the duties imposed on them, but instead of making that clear to governments they just break the law whenever possible because they know they will mostly get away with it. The main change needed is an easy means of making them properly accountable. If we could also add in a system whereby the reports used for assessments come from services independent of local authorities, I'd be happy.

I seriously doubt that figure, unless "SEND" is being interpreted very loosely. That would be around a quarter of all the children in private schools. Given that very few children with SEND will be in the big public schools, and indeed that many smaller schools are very competitive and pressured academically, that would push proportions in other schools to around 35% or more, which just doesn't correlate with other reports.

I'd love councils to be held accountable, services that work and professionals that write specifiedand quantified reports. That would be amazing.

I think ultimately it comes down to cash as with everything else. Kids with disabilities are easy target as are adults with disabilities.

I do think they'll make changes to the legislation and I agree families will be worse off. My son costs around £120000 PA for his package. I know of children who have even more funding. I won't deny him any of that but I know the system is breaking and I know it can't go on like this.

Scary thing is that next election the tories getting back in is the least bad scenario we can expect. Labour are out of the running already after the winter fuel allowance fiasco. I'm really worried that reform are going to gain ground. Look at my bank account and tell me parents of autistic children are rolling in cash.

The trouble with the appeal system is that it's so slow, and getting slower because it's overwhelmed. Although it is certainly the case that some of the worst effects of safety valve agreements can be mitigated by parents being quite rigorous about enforcing the law, both through the appeal system and by using judicial review when councils are blatantly breaking the law. There are apparently some legal challenges to SVs going on now which I really hope will put an end to the dodgy practices councils are putting in place in a desperate attempt to comply with obligations under these agreements.

The sensible answer really is for the DfE to write off deficits in SEND budgets. In an ideal world they would also be funding local authorities much better, but we all know how much competition there is out there for adequate funding.

Come off it, no-one is going to remember or care about WFA in five years' time.

I don't think the WFA will be an isolated thing.

There was a thread on here yesterday by a woman who is pregnant and will struggle to afford maternity leave because the board of the company where she works was supposed to approve an enhanced maternity leave policy and has failed to do so. Half the posters on that thread were talking about how it makes sense that the board didn't approve it because they'll need to see what is in the autumn budget and whether they can actually afford to pay women enhanced maternity leave depending on how much of a tax burden Labour want to shift on to big companies. If the Starmer government turns out to be the reason people don't get better maternity benefits or pay rises or what have you, that will factor into people's voting decisions in 5 years' time. A lot of people voted Labour in the belief that nothing could be worse than the Tories, but if life turns out to be worse under Labour they're not going to be happy.

It's obvious the government is going to have to make some tough decisions about the economy, because they inherited a horrendous mess. They made no secret of that before they were elected.

It's standard political practice and, indeed, good sense to get all the tough stuff done early on in your term of office when you are first elected into government. That way hopefully it will have had its effect and the economy will be better in a couple of years' time, at which point they can ease off the brakes and start spreading the benefits appropriately, in good time before the next election. It's a truism that a week is a long time in politics.

You're not wrong, but the difficulty is that Labour didn't really offer anything other than not being the Tories. Their only real selling point was that things could only get better and couldn't possibly get worse. If that turns out not to be true, people aren't going to be happy about it.

You think LAs haven't stated repeatedly that they have insufficient funds? Lobbied government about it?

The problem is that local authorities have full responsibility to meet SEND needs, but don't get to set their budget to meet those needs. It's a ridiculous system that was never fit for purpose, but a clever move by government who just point the finger at the local authorities that they have thrown under the bus budget -wise.

Well looks like Starmer has just offered to work with the Tories on this.

If Badenoch becomes leader then I guess that will never happen.