Any hope of improving the education of detained young people must include addressing their special educational needs. It is a frightening statistic that 70% of those young people have special educational needs and 20% of them currently have statements.
The existing statutory duties placed on those councils that have a youth offender institution in their area—a host authority—by the Apprenticeship, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009 are to use,
“best endeavours to secure that appropriate special educational provision is made”,
but of course councils have never had the funding or the commissioning responsibility for securing that education. Those duties are currently fulfilled through contracts made by the Education Funding Agency funded by the Ministry of Justice.
As the concept of the host authority has never been implemented in practice, it would perhaps be helpful to see this complicated situation resolved by repealing those clauses in the Apprenticeship, Skills, Children and Learning Act 2009 that refer to the host authorities. The Government have acknowledged that the current situation is not working, and could use the opportunity to make provision for young offenders with special educational needs that can work in practice and really address the needs of those young people.
7 pm
The amendment that I am speaking to places a duty on local authorities either to maintain an education health and care plan for a child or young person who is detained, or to ensure that specified education provision is met for that young person in accordance with that plan. It places a duty on the governing body of a custodial facility to provide information about its special educational provision in the local special educational needs offer. It is important that the special educational needs of young people in custody are addressed, and that particular attention is paid to provision on their release. It will be helpful if the Minister clarifies in his reply which model the Government wish to adopt for commissioning education for young people in custody.
The noble Lord, Lord Ramsbotham, passed me a note, as he did to the noble Lord, Lord Addington, saying that there was one issue that he particularly wanted to raise. I will raise it on his behalf now. He met with two Ministers, my noble friend Lord Nash and Edward Timpson earlier last month when they indicated that they were proposing to move by ensuring that the host authorities were responsible for informing young offender institutions of anybody on an EHC plan. These institutions were encouraged to carry out assessments to enable the EHC plans to be made. He thought that these institutions were included in the list of educational establishments and were bound by the SEN regulations in the Bill to do this in any case. Obviously, that part of the local offer regarding choice of establishment does not apply because they have no choice over custody.
The noble Lord was encouraged to withdraw this amendment, but he wants it in Hansard because he wants the Minister to address it when he sums up. If it helps, I will pass on his letter. I have probably made a right mess of it because it is a letter written to me, as opposed to a speech, so I will hand it to my noble friend Lord Nash and he can perhaps reply to it directly, rather than doing it now.