Education and Skills Bill

moved Amendment No. 59: 59: After Clause 10, insert the following new Clause— ““Duty to assess education and training provision (1) A local education authority in England must prepare assessments of the sufficiency of the provision of education and training provision in their area (““education and training assessments””). (2) The first education and training assessment must be prepared before the end of the period of one year beginning with the commencement of this section. (3) Subsequent education and training assessments must be prepared at intervals not exceeding three years. (4) The authority must keep an education and training assessment prepared by them under review until the education and training assessment is superseded by a further education and training assessment. (5) Regulations may make provision requiring an education and training assessment— (a) to deal with prescribed matters, or be prepared according to prescribed criteria; (b) to be in the prescribed form; and (c) to be published in the prescribed manner. (6) In preparing an education and training assessment and keeping it under review, a local education authority in England must— (a) consult such persons, or persons of such a description, as may be prescribed; and (b) have regard to any guidance from time to time by the Secretary of State.”” The noble Baroness said: I shall speak also to Amendment No. 61A, which is in my name and that of my noble friend. These two amendments deal with the responsibilities placed on local authorities by Clause 10, which make them the effective body required to implement this part of the Bill. The purpose of the first amendment is to require local authorities to audit the sufficiency and diversity of education and training provision in their area. The second is to ensure that there is a suitable place for every young person aged 16 to 18, whatever their needs. The Secretary of State must be satisfied that there is sufficient and diverse provision before the duty to participate under Clause 2 can come into force. These amendments have been proposed to us by the Special Educational Consortium. The consortium is anxious, pointing out that there are approximately 772,000 disabled children under the age of 16 and that around one in five pupils have some form of special educational need. The Special Educational Consortium supports the fundamental principles of the Education and Skills Bill, including the proposal to extend the requirement to stay in school and education to the age of 18. It recognises that many 16 year-olds also stay on in school or move into further education and training. However, those most at risk in the system are least likely to stay on, and that disproportionately includes disabled pupils and pupils with special educational needs. The Disability Rights Commission found that non-disabled young people are twice as likely as their disabled peers to transfer to sixth form or college at 16-plus. This has a significant impact on life chances. By the age of 19, 9 per cent of non-disabled young people are not in education, employment or training whereas, by our definition, 27 per cent of disabled young people are NEETs. One of the Special Educational Consortium’s key concerns is the balance of responsibility between individual young people and the local education authorities. As currently drafted the Bill imposes sanctions that can include criminal penalties for individual pupils who are not in appropriate full-time education or training, as it imposes only a general duty through Clause 10 on local education authorities to promote participation in such education and training. In line with Barnardo’s, the Special Educational Consortium believe that the success of the Bill will rely on providing the relevant learning opportunities and appropriate support for young people with SEN who want to stay on. The Special Educational Consortium believes that young people can benefit from the Bill only if local authorities have the appropriate capacity to make the assessments and if there is a range of appropriate high quality provision available to them. The duties set out in the amendments would rebalance responsibilities. It would place an explicit duty on local authorities to audit the sufficiency and diversity of education and training provision in their area and ensure that they have the appropriate assessment capabilities and that there is a suitable place and support for every young person aged 16 to 18, particularly disabled young people and those with learning difficulties or special educational needs. Many local authorities currently find it quite difficult to meet the requirements for assessment within the current age ranges in schools. Children with special educational needs are often identified in primary schools, even in reception classes. By the age of six or seven, many of the behavioural traits that lead the children later to drop out of school are apparent but the help that schools get from their local education authorities, from educational psychologists and behaviour support and management, is often not very great—one or two afternoons a term from an LEA specialist. In particular, there is a huge shortage—I have spoken of this before—of educational psychologists. Partly because of that shortage, turnover is great. Many schools find that they are just not getting the support that they need. If our aspiration is that these young people should be able to receive through local authorities the support that is in the Bill, many local authorities will have to think hard about their provision. Currently, the responsible core provision for 16 to 18 year-olds rests with the Learning and Skills Council. I return to the arguments of the Special Educational Consortium. It recognises that the duty set out in the amendments could not be implemented until funding and responsibility is transferred to local authorities. That will require further legislation, which we have just discussed. Amendment No. 59 involves the, "““Duty to assess education and training provision””." It requires local authorities to, "““prepare assessments of the sufficiency of the provision of education and training provision in their area””." Amendment No. 61A relates to the, "““Duty to secure sufficient and diverse education and training provision””." It states: "““A local education authority in England must ensure, as far as is reasonably practicable, that the provision of education and training is sufficient to meet the requirements of young persons in their area””." In determining this, it must, "““have regard to the needs of young persons … for a diverse range of academic and vocational provision … must have regard to the provision of education and training which is suitable for disabled young persons and those with learning difficulties, and … must have regard to the adequacy of assessment procedures in relation to special educational needs and the importance of early assessment and continuing support if a young person with special educational needs is to fulfil his potential, and … may have regard to any education and training which they expect to be available outside their area””." The amendments would put substantial responsibilities on local authorities to provide this diversity of provision and to meet the needs of those with special educational needs and disabilities. I beg to move.