Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-48)
PROFESSOR AL
AYNSLEY-GREEN
5 DECEMBER 2005
Q40 Chairman: All of us know of cases
where children have psychological problems and, with a supportive
family, it is very difficult to find out because of confidentiality
what parents can do to support them in that situation. It is not
that crystal clear, is it?
Professor Aynsley-Green: You are
absolutely right. It is not black and white, despite what many
people would like it to be. Every case needs to be judged on its
merits because you are quite right. Again, children tell me that
very often they cannot talk to their parents which comes back
to the point I made several minutes ago about the need for children
to have someone to turn to locally that they can trust. This word
"trust" is critically important in this context.
Q41 Jeff Ennis: The Schools White
Paper has come under a certain amount of criticism for what are
perceived to be inconsistencies and conflicts with other areas
within the education field. Do you see any conflicts within the
Schools White Paper and the Every Child Matters agenda?
Professor Aynsley-Green: It would
be nice to have Every Child Matters embedded as an underpinning
philosophy for the Schools White Paper. There is a great deal
of debate about it at the present time. There is much that I applaud
in the White Paper. You will not be surprised to hear me applaud
the legislation, for example, on school transport arrangements.
This last weekend I spent the day on Saturday with the young people
from Whiz Kids Board. Whiz Kids is a charity which deals specifically
with the needs of children and young people who are disabled.
Hearing them talk about the transport arrangements was extremely
worrying. I am also very pleased about the official standards.
This is long overdue in terms of what we can do. The issue about
giving teachers the right to discipline pupils is a contentious
issue. We have some quite robust views on this. We would not want
to see this power of discipline to be extended to those who were
not trained and properly informed about how to apply discipline
and restraint in particular. There are a number of issues that
generate serious debate that we have concerns about. I am especially
very pleased to hear that there is going to be a focus on improving
the outcomes of marginal groups, Pakistani, Bangladeshi and above
all travelling children. I have concerns about them. I think my
answer is there is a lot in this that I support. There is a lot
that causes me concern and I look forward very much to ongoing
debate. We will be consulting children and making our forward
positions clear in due course.
Q42 Jeff Ennis: You did not mention
in your answer the situation with regard to admissions procedures
within the Schools White Paper. The LGA, for example, are very
critical of that, saying they think it might make it harder for
vulnerable children to get an appropriate school place. Do you
share that concern?
Professor Aynsley-Green: There
must be a concern, not least with this word "choice".
I use the word "choice" in the context of disabled children
and young people. There often is no choice for them so here is
a paradox that needs to be resolved. How can we get to children
who are forced to travel many miles because their local school
will not have wheelchair access, for example? There is no choice
for them. What I would like to see thought through are some practical
examples of what difference this would make in a locality.
Q43 Jeff Ennis: That leads me nicely
onto the issue of increased parent power within the White Paper.
Is giving parents increased power and the possibility of setting
up their own schools and all that sort of stuff likely to result
in better outcomes for all children? I am thinking primarily about
deprived children whose parents probably do not have as loud a
shout as some of the chattering classes.
Professor Aynsley-Green: The jury
must be out until we see the impact of what happens. It could
be beneficial; it may be detrimental. Inclusion in our society
is a very important principle we should work for. I should be
somewhat alarmed if we found very isolationist schools being set
up where children were outwith the mainstream of what being English
means. How we reconcile that particular set of issues is going
to be challenging.
Q44 Jeff Ennis: This is a supplementary
on the point earlier about transitions being very important periods.
One transition period I am very concerned about—I am thinking
about children suffering from autism and Asperger's in particular—is
when they leave the comfort zone of the education sector at the
age of 19 and then they come under the umbrella of adult social
services. You specifically deal with children up to the age of
19. What sort of liaison and what linkage do you feel you need
as a children's commissioner to make sure that we can have a smooth
transition from children with special educational needs when they
become adults?
Professor Aynsley-Green: This
is an excellent question and it is so real to the lives of so
many young people. As I have seen in my own medical practice,
disabled children have a system. It may not be the Peto Institute
of Budapest but at least there is a system. When they come to
transit to adult services, they literally fall off the cliff.
We have to do several things. First, we need to have a cultural
change, recognising there are issues about the transition. That
means a cultural change in our services. Immediately, there is
a big issue about the provision of adolescent health facilities.
The Committee may be astonished to hear there is only one full
time physician in the whole of the UK who is trained by north
American or Australian standards to be expert in the medical needs
of adolescents. What does that say about the focus we have had
in the past on the needs of adolescents? We need to have a cultural
change where transition is seen to be important, not just for
health but for social care as well. I am really concerned about
new bunkers being created so I would like to see some specialism
begin to emerge.
Q45 Chairman: You ought to talk to
some of your friends in the Royal College.
Professor Aynsley-Green: I would
very much like to get the Royal College on board. We have made
a lot of reference to this national service framework, standard
four, which is a growing up standard. These are really important
issues and the consequences can be tragic. As you have heard,
recently, a mother murdered her son with Down syndrome because
she had no support whatsoever in the community.
Q46 Jeff Ennis: My final question
is to do with a clash of cultures in terms of professional groupings.
I always quote the example in 1986 when Mrs Thatcher did away
with South Yorkshire County Council and trading standards came
under the purview of Barnsley Council. We looked at environmental
health and I guess there was an 18 month/two year period where
the two bodies were more or less fighting each other for control
of that particular discipline. Are we going to face that particular
scenario because we have health, social services and education
all coming together now under the Every Child Matters agenda?
Is the clash of the different approaches and the different professions
going to create a barrier?
Professor Aynsley-Green: It is
a problem. From my own experience of well over 400 visits across
the country to see for myself, including Yorkshire, we are confronted
by bunkers and silos for historical reasons of territory, funding
streams, professional accountability etc. We have to break out
of those bunkers. The way forward, we argue, is the child's journey
concept that we road tested. We know it works, for example, because
of speech and language therapy. I am sure the Committee knows
that until recently a two year old in London could wait two and
a half years for an assessment for speech and language therapy.
That is catastrophic when the child starts to communicate. Now
in at least three places in London there is no wait, not because
they have been given more resources or more therapists but because
they have redesigned their services around the child's journey.
They have asked, "Why are the children coming to us? What
are the milestones we expect them to go through for each of the
conditions that they suffer from and what are the needs?"
The most important challenge is what are the competencies to match
those needs. That is how speech and language therapy is being
transformed here in three locations in London. They are bringing
in teachers and classroom assistants to work with communications.
In Liverpool, I saw rent-a-granddad where the community is bringing
in grandparents to read to children. The way to break down these
very real silos and bunkers is to use the child's journey and
have a competency approach programme to designer services.
Q47 Chairman: Thank you very much
for your attendance today. We have found this a very valuable
first meeting. We have another session now with the Training and
Development Agency and the National College for School Leadership.
I am reminded of two things before you go. As it is your duty
to look at what government and departments do and how they impinge
on children, you answered the question on the White Paper but
we would like a more thorough reply quite quickly on how you view
the implications of the White Paper.
Professor Aynsley-Green: You will
get it. [2]
Q48 Chairman: We will be writing
up after Christmas. Secondly, I hope that you will be able to
come back because we are looking at special education. Although
Jeff Ennis touched on that, we want to look at the whole statementing
area and much else that I know you will have a particular view
on.
Professor Aynsley-Green: I have
enjoyed this conversation. I hope it will be the start of an ongoing
relationship. I hope I have persuaded you that we are making fairly
rapid progress on the development of the children's commission.
My last point comes from my very first point, which is how do
you want me to relate to you. Can I be slightly mischievous and
say that there are a lot of other select committees who legitimately
should be focused on children? Would it be useful, for example,
for me to meet with the chairs of other select committees and
is it not possible to think of a children's select committee that
might bring to account health, justice, social care, education
and not just primarily with the badge of education?
Chairman: It is very refreshing to have
one of our witnesses suggest constitutional changes of that kind.
The Committee has looked at Every Child Matters and the
implications for the wide range of responsibilities that gives
this Committee and I am already talking to chairs of the other
relevant committees about whether there should be a subcommittee
of committees in order to carry through that responsibility. That
is work in progress. Thank you very much.
2 Not received. Back
| 
