“Report on supporting children’s learning code of practice”
The next item of business is the debate on motion S3M-6364, in the name of Karen Whitefield, on the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee’s “Report on supporting children’s learning code of practice”. We are extremely tight for time this afternoon. I warn members that the Presiding Officers will switch off a member’s microphone if he or she speaks for longer than they have been advised. I call Karen Whitefield to speak to and move the motion on behalf of the committee. Four minutes, please.
14:37
I am pleased to open this short debate on behalf of the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee on our report on “Supporting Children’s Learning: Code of Practice (Revised Edition) 2010”.
In 2004, the Parliament passed the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2004 which, for the first time, established comprehensively in statute that children with additional support needs are entitled to support from their education authority and others to enable them to make the most of the education that is provided for them. As members will be aware, the act places the Scottish ministers under a duty to publish a code of practice. The Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Act 2009 established the rights of children with additional support needs, and of their parents, to make placing requests to another education authority. It also made a number of other changes to the 2004 act to address some post-implementation issues.
As Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee colleagues and the Minister for Children and Early Years are aware, the progress of the legislation was at times difficult, but the bill was eventually passed with a number of significant additions that were inserted at stages 2 and 3, including the right to free advocacy and a duty on education authorities to provide information to parents.
During the bill’s progress, the committee recognised that many of the matters that stakeholders had raised, particularly on ensuring consistency of practice and on there being clearer criteria for comprehensive support plan decisions, were matters for the code of practice rather than the bill. At the time, the minister promised an early review of the code of practice. He pledged that the review would update the code following the changes that the 2009 act had brought about and that it would place ASL in the current policy context. He said that the review would also clarify the circumstances in which placing requests could be made. Finally, and importantly, it would clarify what is meant by the term “significant” in the phrase “significant additional support”. Many people told the committee that the guidance in this regard is crucial.
Most members will have some awareness of the 2004 and 2009 acts, having been contacted by constituents who are experiencing difficulties in attaining appropriate levels of support for their children. However, some members will be less aware of the provision in section 27 of the 2004 act, which provides that the Scottish ministers may not publish the code of practice until it has been laid before the Scottish Parliament for a period of 40 days. That procedure reflects the fact that the code is key to ensuring that the system works well for children with additional support needs.
The introduction to the draft code states that the code explains the duties on education authorities and other agencies to support children’s and young people’s learning and provides guidance on the 2009 act’s provisions and on the supporting framework of secondary legislation. It also
“sets out arrangements for avoiding and resolving differences between families and authorities.”
Recently the committee took evidence from officials and was told that extensive consultation had taken place. As a result of that consultation, significant changes were made to the draft code and some of the worked examples that it provides were made a bit trickier so that it would reflect the reality of more complex and less straightforward situations that might arise.
When we scrutinised the draft code, one concern was raised with me. The National Autistic Society pointed out that the section in the code on how parents and education authorities should work together, which was previously in chapter 6, had been removed. However, with a little digging around, it became apparent that the section had been omitted in error. I am pleased to say that civil servants responded quickly to the concern that had been expressed, as the society pointed out how valuable that section of the code had been to its advocacy service. Although there have been few comments on the revised code, the issue highlights the value of placing the code before the Parliament for scrutiny.
I must ask you to finish.
I am sure that all members welcome the code of practice as a document that will make it clearer, particularly for education authorities, what services—
I am afraid that we must move on.
Motion S3M-6364 moved,
That the Parliament agrees that the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee’s 3rd Report, 2010 (Session 3): Report on supporting children’s learning code of practice (SP Paper 436), together with the Official Report of the Parliament’s debate on the report, should form the Parliament’s response to the Scottish Government on its revised code of practice, supporting children’s learning.
14:42
The committee was unanimous in its approval of the code, after it had received a tiny bit of clarification from the Scottish Government about the consultation process. The renewal of the code was made necessary by the 2009 act, which amended the 2004 act. I hope that pupils with additional support needs and their parents and carers are now finding things a little easier, as they seek the help that they need. It must seem to them that we move terribly slowly in this place, but I am sure that they will agree that it is important that, instead of just dashing through things, we take the time to get things right, so that we get the best legislation for the children who need it.
As members can see from my copy of the code, it was an easy night-time read. The code contains some important provisions. I welcome the fact that it sets out the functions and duties of education authorities in relation to additional support needs. The benefit of co-ordinated support plans was teased out well during consideration of the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill. The guidance in the code is helpful in setting out what local authorities must do and what parents need to know.
All members will know that the transitions from primary school to secondary school and from there on leaving school always pose particular challenges. The code emphasises the importance of exchange of information and the merits of a detailed co-ordinated support plan. It is very important that the child’s views are taken into account.
The code of practice will ensure that local authorities and agencies fulfil their roles and responsibilities with regard to children with additional support needs, and it will give parents and carers the guidance that they need to support their children through their learning. I commend it to Parliament.
14:43
I, too, am pleased that Parliament has the opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to additional support for learning in a relatively uncontentious debate, and to restate its consensual support for the direction of travel. As both Karen Whitefield and Christina McKelvie said, the code of practice is one of the most important documents in the implementation of the policy that was put in place in 2004 and restated in 2009.
One problem that has arisen since 2004 is that of uneven implementation of additional support for learning across the country. In some areas, local authorities’ interpretations of what is needed differ from those of families and pupils. We were expecting upwards of 10,000 CSPs to be introduced as a result of the 2004 act, but there have been fewer than 2,000. The number is not crucial, but it is important that there is fairness and even-handedness.
There can often be a battle between parents and local authorities over additional support for learning. That is unfair on both parties. Local authorities are the providers of additional support while being in the invidious position of being gatekeeper to the public purse. The code of practice is essential in ensuring that there is fairness on all sides and a clear understanding of the rights that were given to parents and the duties that are expected of local authorities.
I have two brief questions for the minister, which are about the important services that are being provided—I doubt that he will have time to answer them. In the context of the role of Independent Special Education Advice Scotland—ISEA—Govan Law Centre and other advocacy services, I would welcome information about when the decision on advocacy services will be made. Will the minister also say whether the additional support for learning implementation group, which involves parents, will continue, and whether more parents, or carers groups such as the Princess Royal Trust for Carers, could be involved in it?
14:45
As the convener of the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee said, the 2004 act provides—this is perhaps slightly unusual—that the Scottish ministers may not publish the code of practice until 40 days after a draft has been laid before the Scottish Parliament, so that evidence can be taken from Government officials on how the code will operate. As far as my party is concerned, that is entirely appropriate, because the code of practice is perhaps the most important document that can influence the quality of support services. It is perhaps even more important than the 2004 and 2009 acts, because it provides local authorities and parents with the most relevant details on how essential support can be provided to children.
The committee flagged up—several times—concerns about how well the previous code had been implemented. It is good that the revised version should provide a much more level playing field across Scotland and an environment in which children who have special needs are identified at the earliest possible stage. I am a former teacher: I think that one of the most important things that the code of practice can do is to facilitate the identification of needs as early as possible, which will make the whole education process much more beneficial.
I am delighted to support the code of practice.
14:47
I thank everyone who contributed to the revised code of practice—in particular the people who responded to the consultation.
The new code includes guidance on the 2009 act, which sought to strengthen and clarify the arrangements for the provision of additional support for children and young people who need assistance to learn. To a certain degree, we improved on the 2004 act and went some way towards addressing parents’ concerns about the first years of operation of the ASL system. The passage of the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill, which amended the 2004 act, was not easy, but I was pleased to be able to play a part in identifying the ASL needs of looked-after children.
The improvements that have been made to the legislation must be delivered on the ground, which is where the code of practice will be hugely important. Throughout the bill’s passage, I and many other people were concerned that parents are not aware of their rights, so I am pleased that the code seeks to clarify the position and ensure that parents are aware of their rights. The committee heard that an advertising campaign to raise awareness had been run and that provision of a handbook or USB device was being considered. Those developments are welcome, given the amendments to the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill that Elizabeth Smith and I lodged.
I am pleased that the code provides more information on what should be provided in a co-ordinated support plan. That should go some way towards addressing the inconsistencies that Ken Macintosh mentioned. The situation needs to be monitored to ensure that children and young people who require additional support get the best possible services and outcomes.
There will be elements of the code that still give rise to debate, as is the case with the legislation. For example, there is an issue to do with the use of the word “significant”. However, the code is an improvement on the previous guidance. It is a crucial document that will be central in ensuring that health services, other agencies and especially education authorities know what they need to do to provide the best possible and most appropriate services and support to children and young people who have additional support needs. We have much pleasure in supporting it.
14:49
I take the opportunity to congratulate Liz Smith on her recent elevation to the front bench. I know that we are short of time in the debate, so I will march on.
I welcome the opportunity to debate—even briefly—the code of practice. I thank the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee for securing the debate and I thank my parliamentary colleagues for their speeches.
This Government is committed to improving the lives of children who have additional support needs. Providing help when it is needed is both the right thing to do and an investment in our future. That is why we introduced the bill that led to the passing of the 2009 act, which had the aim of creating a stronger and better system for supporting children’s learning, and for ensuring that all children and young people receive the additional support that is required to enable them to meet their individual needs and to become successful learners.
The code of practice explains the duties that have been placed on education authorities and other agencies to support children’s learning. We have revised and updated the code of practice in order to reflect the changes that were made by the 2009 act and to respond to requests for further clarification and information. During the parliamentary debates on the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill in 2009, I gave a commitment that the redrafted code would place the legislation in the context of the current policies of getting it right for every child, the early years framework and curriculum for excellence; that it would provide further clarification of the term “significant” in the phrase “significant additional support”, the need for which is one of the criteria for a co-ordinated support plan; and that it would clarify the process of making placing requests. The revised code of practice addresses each of those commitments.
In its report on the code of practice, the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee raised a number of issues around consultation and co-ordinated support plans. I want to respond briefly to those comments. The Government held a public consultation exercise between 5 October 2009 and 8 January 2010, in which we sought comments on the proposed changes to the code of practice; 4,400 letters were issued inviting comments. Because I recognise the importance of engaging with parents on such an important issue, we commissioned Children in Scotland to host five consultation and information events across the country. As well as the formal consultation, we established an additional support for learning implementation group, which comprises key stakeholders, including representatives from parent groups, to support and inform implementation of the 2009 act and finalisation of the code of practice. That group will continue its work, and we will look to enhance its membership with additional parent reps.
I understand that committee members raised some important questions about co-ordinated support plans. The code of practice includes detailed information on the content and format of a CSP. It clearly sets out what is required and expected of education authorities as regards timescales, engagement and consultation. It also sets out the duties on appropriate agencies, such as national health service boards, and the role of the co-ordinator, who is responsible for monitoring provision to ensure that the agreed services are in place and for taking action to secure those services, if necessary.
I thank everyone who contributed to the consultation process or who attended and contributed to the consultation events, members of the additional support for learning implementation group, and parliamentary colleagues on the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee. The code aims to help education authorities and other agencies to make effective decisions and to deliver the support that children and young people need to make the most of their education and learning.
I invite Kenneth Gibson to wind up the debate on behalf of the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee.
14:53
On behalf of the committee, I thank all the speakers in this afternoon’s debate and all those who made the 2009 act possible. As the committee’s deputy convener, I submit that the committee’s report on the
“code of practice ... together with the Official Report of the Parliament’s debate on the report, should form the Parliament’s response to the Scottish Government on its revised code of practice, supporting children’s learning.”
The revisions to the code of practice are of great importance, as they stem from stakeholder concerns that did not appropriately fit in the Education (Additional Support for Learning) (Scotland) Bill to revise the 2004 act. The committee’s due diligence has ensured that all relevant stakeholders’ concerns have been addressed, which satisfies the requirement of section 27(3) of the 2004 act. Most important, we have confirmed that parents of children with additional support needs have had those needs heard. In addition, the Scottish Government confirmed to the committee that it had consulted all education authorities, health boards and other appropriate agencies under the 2004 act, so members of the Parliament can be assured that their constituency views were noted during the consultation process.
We also raised the need for a consistent approach to co-ordinated support plans. We were satisfied with the Scottish Government’s response to those concerns, and we note the minister’s comments this afternoon.
We took evidence from the support for learning division and the Scottish Government, and we thank those who provided evidence to the committee. In addition, the Subordinate Legislation Committee considered the code of practice, and the Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee has noted its comments with thanks.
The Education, Lifelong Learning and Culture Committee has thoroughly reviewed the code of practice, and the Parliament should feel confident in our response. As stated before, the code of practice is key to ensuring that the system works well for children with additional support needs. Education authorities need to know clearly what they must do to provide appropriate support where necessary.
In due course, the practitioners will tell us whether the code does its job properly—that is, whether it results in speedier and better decisions that lead to better experiences for the children and young people concerned. Future education committees may wish to continue to monitor it.
Now that the Government has examined our response, which is laid out in the committee’s report on the code of practice and the Official Report of the debate in the chamber, I and the rest of the committee look forward to the Government proceeding appropriately so that children with additional support needs have the best possible experience in the education system in the years ahead.