---

Special Educational Needs

I begin by saying how delighted and privileged I am to have been given this 90-minute debate on such an important subject. Also, my thanks go to those in the Public Gallery; I recognise some Bedfordshire parents. The special educational needs spectrum is wide; it runs from children who are simply unable to organise themselves—I am slightly unlucky in that respect, because I seem to have three of those—to children who need round-the-clock intensive support and care. We have all heard of Baroness Warnock, the architect of and authority on inclusion. She recants inclusion; she thinks that it has gone too far. During Prime Minister's questions, the Prime Minister was asked for a review of SEN policy, and Lord Adonis is searching for a third way. The new education White Paper on SEN is, frankly, depressing. It is not difficult to see why and how Baroness Warnock originally reached her conclusion on the inclusion agenda. At the time, children with physical disabilities—regardless of how intelligent or mentally able they were—were automatically segregated from their peers and sent to a special school, very often a residential school many miles away from parents and family. Such children were denied the opportunity to interact socially with peers and to benefit from the curriculum taught to other children of similar academic abilities. One reason why Baroness Warnock recants the inclusion agenda is that she personally knows children for whom it has not worked. Those children have autistic spectrum disorders—when I mention ASD I will be referring to children whose autism is at the higher end of the continuum—and Asperger's. They have legal protection under Acts of 1981, 1993 and 1996, and more recently under the Special Educational Needs and Disability Act 2001—SENDA. Following the introduction of the Education Act 1996, SEN children had a legal right to an education commensurate with their needs. For those with milder learning difficulties, that might be in a mainstream school with additional help. For those with more complex and difficult needs, that might be in a special school. Local education authorities were, for the first time, accountable and legally responsible for providing that education. The statementing process came to result in a legally binding contract between the parent, the LEA and the school. Unfortunately, the 2001 Act produced an unintended by-product—and I do think that it was unintended. The Under-Secretary of State for Education and Skills, the hon. Member for Liverpool, Garston (Maria Eagle) here today steered the 2001 Act through Parliament, and I believe that that was done with the best intentions. In fact, I support the 2001 Act, apart from its unfortunate by-product. The 2001 Act states that there is a duty to educate children with special needs in the mainstream unless that is against the wish of the parents or incompatible with the education of other children. Unfortunately, that has been interpreted by many LEAs as meaning that it is Government policy to educate all children in mainstream schools. LEAs view it as an extension of inclusion and a manifestation of political ideology.