| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Blatch: My Lords, does the noble Baroness agree—from what I know of the noble Baroness, I am sure she will agree—that a particular problem with regard to disruption in the classroom is that occasioned by young people with autistic spectrum disorder? That very often results in disruption in the classroom. What is really needed is more screening and earlier intervention so that such children are not simply dubbed as disruptive and then left to the devices of a pupil referral unit.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I could not agree more with the noble Baroness. It is absolutely right and proper to ensure that children with special educational needs are identified early, that support is provided for them within the classroom and that the right kind of support is provided for teachers so that they understand the needs of such children. We also need to ensure that, by working together, those children can enjoy a happy and fulfilling life at school and thus are able to remain in mainstream schooling, where that is appropriate for them, throughout their education.
Lord Dormand of Easington: My Lords, is my noble friend aware that one of the most difficult problems, if not the most difficult problem, for teachers is that of dealing with disruptive children? It may well be—I am sure my noble friend will agree—that exclusion should be used in certain circumstances and for a certain time. Is any research being done and training given to overcome the increasingly difficult problem of dealing with disruptive children?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, we are very concerned about disruption in schools. Within the department I chair a group which is looking specifically at behavioural issues. We are working with colleagues across departments, particularly those in educational psychology and those from the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Unit at the Department of Health, in order to achieve solutions.
It is worth saying to my noble friend that we are also interested in looking at those schools which have been very successful at ensuring that children are not excluded through working with, for example, learning support mentors and establishing learning support units on site. We are developing a range of strategies which will enable our children to be in mainstream schools, while also supporting our teachers, for whom this is a serious issue.
Lord Pilkington of Oxenford: My Lords, in view of recent press reports, has the Minister paid attention to what teachers have to face in the classroom when dealing with disruptive children? There are times when children need to be referred to pupil referral units, but I gather that the units in East London are small. I speak from anecdotal evidence, but I understand that in Hackney and Tower Hamlets, there are hardly any such units. How are teachers to deal with pupils who curse and defy them when all they can do is to refer them for counselling and so forth? Attention must be given to providing sufficient referral units, and after that of course bringing children back into the mainstream. Can the Minister tell the House what attention is being given to the provision of referral units?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for his questions. We are ensuring that we have on the ground in local education authorities the right breadth of provision and support for students. Pupil referral units are an important part of that provision. We are ensuring, through the allocation of resources, that we do have in place the right level of support for young people.
However, this problem also concerns preventive measures in the classroom. It is about ensuring that our children receive the right kind of support and, I would argue, it is about parental involvement. We must ensure that parents work with schools, that they send the right messages to their young children about the role of schools, that they work with teachers and are seen to be supportive and respectful of schools.
Baroness Walmsley: My Lords, can the Minister confirm that learning support units in schools, to which she referred in an earlier answer, often provide an easier route back into the mainstream after a temporary exclusion has been, it is hoped, successful? Can she tell the House a little about the balance between the two? Are learning support units always the first recourse, with exclusion units being the last recourse for children who cause disruption in the classroom?
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, the answer to the noble Baroness's question depends partly on what resources a particular local education authority has put in place. We believe that learning support units are making a big difference and we are particularly interested in their work in inner-city schools. However, they are not yet in place everywhere and so they will not be available for every school.
However, decisions also depend on the reason for the exclusion. I think that noble Lords would agree that, wherever possible, we want those children who come out of mainstream education and into a unit to be able to return to school in due course. That also applies to special schools when considering behavioural issues in children. Among their criteria for success is the number of children they are able to reintegrate into mainstream education.
Baroness Carnegy of Lour: My Lords, the noble Baroness has told us that the Government have abandoned a system of targets in relation to children excluded from school. Does the Minister agree that that system has proved totally unsuitable? In certain areas of activity, targets can be really very damaging to the work of professionals on the ground. Will she agree to bring to the attention of her right honourable friend that there are other areas in education where targets might well be damaging and, indeed, other areas in government, such as the National Health Service? It is only too easy to set targets and think that one is managing from the centre, but they can do a great deal of damage.
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: My Lords, noble Lords will know that I have been on the receiving end of many targets in the course of my professional life. I have to say that targets play an important role in ensuring not least that the Government do what they say they will do. Noble Lords in this House will certainly ensure that the Government report back on the targets they have set. Indeed, for many organisations, including schools and—if I may trespass into another area of public sector life—the health service, it is important that we set ourselves the right kind of targets. With regard to education, we are discussing here the one chance that young people have to receive a good education. I think that we should set targets for ourselves.
NHS: Latex-related Allergies
3.6 p.m.
Baroness Gibson of Market Rasen asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How much the National Health Service has paid out in early retirement costs and compensation payments for those forced to leave their jobs due to latex-related allergies.
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath): My Lords, information on the costs of early retirement or compensation payments due to specific medical conditions is not available centrally, although the extra cost of retirement through ill health in the NHS has been calculated at £60,000 per employee retired. Of the 4,482 staff who left the service on grounds of ill health during 2000-01, some 1.7 per cent were due to skin allergies, some of which may have been attributable to latex.
Baroness Gibson of Market Rasen: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that reply. Is he aware that many workers in the health service are extremely worried about latex allergies? It is not only a question of latex gloves, but also of the latex used in many other areas of a hospital. Does he agree that, since alternative materials are available—for example, for latex gloves—it would be wise for hospitals to provide such alternatives for those workers who are worried about exposure to latex? To inform the House, I should say that latex can cause skin disease, but it can also trigger conditions such as asthma and other respiratory problems.
Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: My Lords, my noble friend is right to suggest that latex is a sensitiser and that it can pose some risk to NHS staff. However, that risk is posed to only a minority. I should also say to my noble friend that some of the alternatives to latex products also contain chemicals which can cause allergic reactions in both staff and patients. The European Commission working group on latex is confident that the current directive provides sufficient protection for patients and staff if it is fully and properly implemented. However, in the light of the Question put by my noble friend and the concerns that she has expressed, the Government are announcing today their intention to reissue guidance to the NHS, thus drawing employers' attention to the problem and to the alternatives to latex that are now available. The guidance stresses the need for staff and management to work together to assess the risks in each case.
Lord Clement-Jones: My Lords, the Minister has talked about guidance, but what steps are being taken by the NHS to centrally source supplies of low-allergy products?
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page