Edward Timpson, Minister of State for Children and Families, LIVE webchat about SEN reforms, on Tuesday 13 November at 12:00pm

[FrancesMumsnet]

You may remember that we were due to have the previous Children's Minister, Sarah Teather, on Mumsnet for a webchat back in September but she was reshuffled just hours beforehand. So we're very pleased that the new Children's Minister, Edward Timpson, will be here for a LIVE webchat on Tuesday 13 November at 12:00pm to discuss the Government?s proposed changes to special educational needs policy.

The Department for Education has been consulting on draft clauses for the Children and Families Bill since September. This is what the DfE says the aims of the bill are:

• Local authorities and local health bodies would be required to plan and commission education, health and care services jointly and publish a clear and transparent 'local offer' of services for children and young people and families.

• A more streamlined assessment process would be put in place, integrating education, health and care services and involving children, young people and their families at its heart.

• A new birth to 25 Education, Health and Care Plan, replacing the current system of Statements and Learning Difficulties Assessments, would reflect the child's or young person's aspirations for the future, as well as their current needs and have a stronger focus on preparing them for adulthood.

• Young people aged 16-25 in further education would have comparable rights to those in schools.

• Families and young people with an Education, Health and Care Plan would have the option of a personal budget for their support.

More information is available here.

Prior to entering Parliament, Edward was a family law barrister in Cheshire, specialising in the cases of vulnerable children. He has two adopted brothers and his parents have fostered 87 children over the last 30 years, many of whom Edward grew up with.

Until his ministerial appointment he was Chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Groups on Adoption & Fostering and Looked After Children & Care Leavers and Vice Chairman for the Runaway & Missing Children group. He is married with three children.

We know that many posters on Mumsnet are deeply involved in the issues highlighted in the draft bill, and that some of you have already responded to related consultations; now's your chance to put your questions and concerns directly to the minister, so please join us live on Tuesday if you can. If you can't make it on the day, please post up your questions in advance here.

Thanks

MNHQ

Agnes, if there were sanctions that regulatory bodies were willing and able to impose, it would mean that LAs would be a lot more careful about following the law. As it is they can ignore the law as much as they want and know that they'll get away with it.

But Mr Timpson has confirmed that the current system of regulation is not going to change in any meaningful way, therefore the LAs can happily continue ignoring their statutory duties with impunity.

Be afraid, be very afraid

@coff33pot

Mr Timson my LA has been great (yes I know its a rarity!) they have gone above and beyond for my son. It was the school itself. So either the LA needs more clout with academies or someone somewhere needs to impose fines or consequences on schools too.

By the time we go along the fight path our children are leaving to go to the next school. Their education still in tatters and trust gone.

It's right that where LAs are stepping up to the plate, as has happened in your experience, we recognise that and encourage other LAs to learn from their success.When it comes to academies, we recognise the increasing role they have to pl;ay in the education of our children and that is why we have included them in the legislation so there is no doubt as to what their legal responsibilities are.

Unfortunately could not be one you could meet as my son won't leave the house or car, has down syndrome among other medical, neurological and physical issues but is NOT a priority !!

Didn't a recent investigation into the LGO demonstrate they were pretty poor at their job?

I haven't time to read the thread yet, but my question is this :

Where does this new provision leave children that are currently on SA+, and have been from Nursery age, that have been repratey refused assessment on the basis that they haven't got an up to date EP report, which the LA's are limiting access to?

My DD has been on SA+ for 11 years now. She is currently in Y10. She has not seen the EP since Y6, and that visit took me 4 years to get. My LA has been repeatedly proven in court to have ILLEGAL 'blanket policies' on statutory assessment. In my case, I have been told that the only way to get my DD assessed by an EP is to pay privately. I can't. I'm a disabled lone parent and 3 of my 4 children have disabilities.

My DS2 has been illegally taken off first SA+, then SA, without consultation, despite the fact that he is not progressing.

Both my DD and my DS2 have multiple disabilities, global development delay, physical disabilities and learning difficulties. Yet I can't get them assessed due to being unable to pay for a private EP report, or to take the LA to court for their refusal to assess.

What protections are going to be put in place to ensure that children like my DD and my DS2 will have the continued support without which they would be unable to access the curriculum. As my DS2 currently is. He is 9yo, and working at a 5-6yo level.

Where is THEIR protection in this legislation?

But now there's no doubt, but there are no sanctions for meeting that obligation, how are you going to change this?

That's it really.

Change the rules all you want, but if LA's are used to ignoring them and flouting them without redress then the current changes make NO difference to anything.

Yes - see HC Select Committee on Communities and Local Government report. An independent auditor was appointed.

@AgnesDiPesto

But the LA is both assessor and funder. They just write plans and statements to resources not needs that's the conflict and the bill will not change that

This why we want to involve parents much earlier in the process and we are looking through the pathfinders how the right level of support can be provided. The cost of conflict in the system means it is the LA's interests to work closely with parents (as set out in the draft clauses) and we are seeing the direct benefits of that happening in the pathfinders.

There are a group of us pulling together our thoughts on this: would you like to meet us Mr Timpson? It's a serious invitation.

In many ways I don't actually care what the rules are, I just want whatever they are to be stuck to.

If I had known the regulatory bodies were going to join the LAs in unlawful practices I would have given up work to educate my ds long ago instead of trying to navigate a system of illusion.

Hi Edward,

I've no question as such but I wanted to say that some years ago our paths crossed professionally and that I remember you to be a really unassuming, decent person. Well done on your appointment to Minister. It reminds me there are some nice Tories after all!

Do you mean "a teenager with Downs Syndrome"???

What chance have children with disabilities and LTmedical conditions have if the people who are making decisions for them see them as disabled first, individual second?

Conflict saves them costs - delaying provision by forcing parents to Tribunal can waste a year of a child's life and save a year of costs. Lying about the level of provisional needed can equally save costs.

Conflict benefits the LA not the parents, many of whom simply give up.

Agnes's point still stands. If the assessment process is not independent of the budgets to provide the help needed, how can a childs needs be truly identified and the parents be satisfied that the contracted health officials are not being told to "not quantify anything" so that the LEA can use this to prevaricate when writing statements

hear her, inappropriate

Sadly my hour is up. I'm sorry I wasn't able to reply to more posts but I can categorically state that my words per minute count has improved in the 60 minutes allotted. I need to go on a refresher typing course! Thanks to all those who have contributed and I will reflect on all your points, queries, concerns and offers to meet so that the dialogue can continue. Thanks and goodbye! Edward

If as in my case your child costs £50000 per year and the LA has allocated £5000 then it is in LA interests to use tribunal as delaying tactic. Why has Dev child been without education for 3 years because he costs too much. Bottom line la staff don't think our children deserve what they would pay for a cancer patient in a heartbeat

Doesn't the Titanic look nicer now the deck-chairs have been rearranged?

Edward, having meetings about meetings about meetings, including involving parents in those to reslove conflict etc. just gives the illusion of intervention without just getting stuck in with the child. It keeps the LA personnel in a job and avoids paying out.

I went to a Team Around the Child meeting once and the level of support promised was amazing.

Someone promised to 'refer' my son, someone else was going to 'observe' him, someone else 'montior' him, someone else was going to 'open a file', another was going to 'cooridnate', and yet another person was 'raise awareness' and yet another was going to 'liaise'.

None of these were outcome based, and all we needed was someone appropriate trained to deliver provision directly to my son, at a fraction of a cost of all the above nonsense. When we asked for this, we got a barrister against us. I'm afraid i can't see anything in what you propose to change this.

A 'local offer' is about as useful as 'opening a file' unless you are focussing on outcomes, evaluation of effectiveness, transparancy about eligability criteria etc.

Thank you Edward. Impressed with your typing speed actually .

at snorbs and the deckchairs on the Titanic.
Sadly I think she has a very good point.

However, I'm glad that you came to talk Mr Timpson and assume that you will look at later comments posted here and those that you ran out of time to answer and take them all on board.

Thanks - I'd be interested in hearing about your thoughts on your pathfinders' practices in refusing SEN DPs at some point.

Another case of LAs picking and choosing which laws they abide by - yet your Dept is aware of this and should openly admonish such unlawful practice.

Equally, it should openly admonish a Director of Education who quite happily gives evidence to Parliament confirming his LA's unlawful practices.