| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
1.16 pm
Mr. James Cran (Beverley and Holderness): My speech will be short because, as I am the final speaker before the Minister's reply to the debate, it has all been said. I entirely agree with my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire (Mr. Lansley) that Friday debates are undoubtedly the best informed in the House. So it has proved today.
I am not an expert on special educational needs, although I am the first hon. Member to have said so in the debate. Members of Parliament, however--almost by definition--collide with the issue because of the problems of some children and parents in our constituencies. As hon. Members have already said in the debate, we are dealing with vulnerable people, and we want to ensure that there is a non-partisan approach to the issue. I think that we have achieved that goal, and that anyone following our debate will take comfort from the fact that the House can occasionally reach such a state--would that we could do so more often.
My hon. Friend the Member for Uxbridge (Mr. Randall) made a very knowledgeable speech and raised some detailed and pertinent issues, which I know that the Minister will address. Like the hon. Member for Brent, North (Mr. Gardiner), I shall study particularly carefully, in the Official Report, his points on emotional and behavioural difficulties. Clearly, he knows a great deal more about the subject than I do--or, I suspect, most hon. Members.
My hon. Friend the Member for Guildford (Mr. St. Aubyn) is responsible for having filched at least three quarters of my intended speech. I had to fling away pages of my speech as he mentioned many of the strategic issues that concern not only hon. Members on both sides of the House but parents and experts. I should simply like it to be known that, if anyone eventually reads my speech--although the ribaldry on Conservative Benches makes me think that no one ever will--he or she will have to read the speech of my hon. Friend the Member for Guildford for a fuller view of the points that I would have made, had I had the time to do so. Later in my speech, I shall outline several concerns raised by my local authority.
My hon. Friend the Member for East Worthing and Shoreham (Mr. Loughton) deserves a medal for attending the debate. I had no idea that his wife was about to give
birth--I trust that that event is not imminent. He gave a knowledgeable speech, which was clearly based on first-hand knowledge derived from his service on a school's board of management.
My hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire never fails to mesmerise me. He has such a wide knowledge of so many subjects that I am getting an inferiority complex. He did not disappoint me today. I took particular note--as I am sure the Minister did--of his comment that the Green Paper promises much. There is very little doubt that that is so. I hope that the Minister will confront the concerns that have been raised today and provide an assurance that the Government will allocate resources and introduce changes in order to fulfil the Green Paper's potential.
I take the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for South Cambridgeshire and several other hon. Members that a number of agencies are involved. However, I shall concentrate on the views of my local authority, East Yorkshire council. It is concerned about good practice in several areas. There is no doubt that that is important, and I suspect that the Minister agrees that probably good practice can be set only by the Government after consultation.
East Yorkshire council is particularly concerned about target setting for SEN pupils in mainstream schools. My local authority believes that the Government should encourage schools to set different targets for children with different needs. Will the Minister address that suggestion in her winding-up speech? My local authority also favours the introduction of a finer grain for early national curriculum levels--which, as the Minister knows, some children never leave. I hope that the Government will consider that point--the Minister may not be in a position to respond today. At the end of the day, a finer grain would allow us to chart more effectively the progress of the children involved and would assuage parents' concerns in that area. Will the Minister bend her mind to that?
I have culled another question from a full brief provided by my local authority, which tells me--and the Minister--that it is taking the matter seriously. No doubt all local authorities do. The document asks how we can encourage dialogue between parents, schools and LEAs and resolve disputes. However, I found the answer rather bland. I shall go hot foot from this debate to my local authority to--upbraid is not quite the word--ask it for a little more information. The answer in the document is:
That is fine as a mission statement. It is what everyone wants. It is what anyone would say about communication between management and work force in a company. It is more difficult to set up a mechanism that allows that. Communication systems also have to be reviewed often. I want to know about the nuts and bolts. If the Minister has anything to say that I can tell my local authority, I shall be delighted.
I should like to reinforce a point made by one of my hon. Friends--I cannot remember which one--and by Labour Members about the need to improve the effectiveness of SEN tribunals. I am not involved in that, as I have said, but, having been taken through the procedures by my local authority and others, I am
astonished by the enormous amount of paperwork that is involved in support of cases going to tribunals--as happens in all Government and local authority systems. There are delays of many months in the tribunals. Ministers must bend their minds to the problem--I know that they will. The Green Paper is one of the more readable that I have come across. I pay tribute to the Government for that.
I have consulted experts in my constituency, who have concluded that decisions should be reached on the basis of written evidence only. Perhaps the Minister would like to take a view on that. Of course, that cannot happen in the most complex cases, but the suggestion should be considered. It would reduce the enormous amount of time and the costs in my large rural area.
I am coming to the end of my few remarks, so that the Minister can put us right. I have asked how we can reduce the paperwork associated with the code of practice. I welcome the fact that the Green Paper addresses that question. My local authority and others have very little to say. I suspect that it is not sure how to reduce the amount of paperwork. How does the Minister think that that can be done? I hope that she will give direction to the local authority, because, as she knows, she is pushing on an open door.
Ms Estelle Morris:
With the leave of the House, Mr. Deputy Speaker, I should like to reply to the debate.
I thank hon. Members for a thoughtful debate which has confirmed what I said at the outset: we have in the House not only a wealth of determination to try to do better in special educational needs, but a wealth of expertise--not necessarily professional expertise in terms of qualifications, but expertise gained from our role as constituency Members. Week in, week out, we meet at our advice bureaux parents of children with special educational needs. That gives us an overall perspective that is not available to others. Combined with that is the knowledge we all have of what goes on in our local schools.
One of the features of special needs education is that people are bound to see the issues from their own perspective. We need to have people who can judge matters from every perspective. Many hon. Members have commented today on the problems faced by parents whereas others have talked about the problems of financing by local authorities. The challenge is to bring all that together in the best way possible.
In the Green Paper, we do not pretend that we have all the answers, although we hope that we have asked the right questions. Hon. Members will have noticed that, at the end of some sections, we have suggested a number of possible responses to the issues raised in them. What I have to say now will be very much in the spirit of
listening to people's ideas. I again assure hon. Members that when we make decisions following the consultation, we shall come back to the House.
"This is best achieved through good communication. There is a need to encourage easier access to LEAs to discuss concerns"
and all the rest of it.
| Next Section
| Index | Home Page |